
«? * 



V A * 


© ^5 ^ 

* o w 0 9 ^ * » J i 

aV \L>^'* *> O’ * Y ‘°' 

Vt* -*i it ^ 





\Q> 

S» * 

* 4 N * 

a. * 

• ^ V 

\0 v*. * 

N. <> & * 

* 0 * 

3 *, * 

A/ t ^w?**'* 0> v V < 

A®’ v .Cx A, v ► 

* ♦ ^ av 


<£*. "’ » « 0 



♦ «N 


® <0 ^r. ■* tjillHlIliil^ *» a V **, o * ,» *7 v/V 

/ <L^' ^^SliPo ^ 't* o^V J|aF * <£> ^ 

O -'•'■*»• <o^ ♦?:;** a <*> *o.** .<? ^ * 

l • B ^ 0 V -0*0,, (O * & * t / « <£> /n V 0 N O 

* v^ „ c *v$SW* ° or v c o 



O' 

■w 


• ^ <* .-afe, /. 

O 'Cft ■* ^liHniik^ ® . \ V o U^Se^Vu- 9 c5 <-*V •* 

J? ^ \fllfp,* <*> ^ / %, •- 

0 O '**S* O <> 'o • A * ,0 O -< . * s 

‘ t 0 M t ^o <J> rt N a «fc_ 

^ i 


* ^6* f^^K” 

4 °- ■ 

v*^v 

V . I\°- cv <<y » 

*• ■%, a* .‘v 

^\ v ", it 'i? 8 

VA 




,v«L * ° ^ 

-. ^o ^ : 

; i° ; 

*««°° . 

c\ ^,0 « * Y * °- o 

V ^ * % 








* 11 


\Q 

♦ -^* k ^^^IvVXN^* ^ N 



/? 'S' 

4 ,v V 



• ^ ^ *' 


O’ , s .”% 


^ o 

4 V^ 

A' ^ ° 

V s& * 



'• V^ v / J< 


V*“\ 



^ <, *'?.?* 4 , G V '^> A v v '^"** f . T .** G ^ % * 

t • 1 ' * 4 ^y c 0 w ® ^ ^o o ^ * •■ ' • ^ Q^ r ° N a ^ 

^d« :\^M'” ?§IMp< ° 

°'‘°° _ %-S*° "°*\\^ ... °°^ 4 '*Vi*\^0 





* * • 0 ^ o <y $ • * ^ r y # 0 

'^\^A.*o ^ ^ -A ^ a^ ; .0 
















*1 

* 




•A V '• 

(A c 0 " ° * . c / . „ <$> 

i '<js$\\^ o * V 'L 

v *5\vv\Y^ _\N * m»({!f/P* ^ ^ 

o 

* V * 

• *0 ^, 

«. < ' <£> 

^ r\ * 

k ✓ <£* ** 

<$> " O N O 


5 ^ 



X> ->A 



<A \>* - 

V 


°*. *"’* A 

O .<V . s • • * 



»• A A \ 




* V '*& 

** .&* '*75^’ <\ 

Q v 0 « O 4 ^o V^ • k ' * 

0 • ,*^Vv * o <A * 



A o* 

K^* ^ * 

r o _0 

^‘"’V 

'^A r'Xfe AA ”Sfe*- ^A 

* ** ** ”W?* ,A ^ 

V x O • A 


* A '- r ' rk 

* V 
■* <K 



A O *••»• A \D ^T.s s A ^ 

*-* v c° v .^;i' A A +* 
* ^ 0 <* ,‘.^\*. - .v * 



\ 




a vT 

«* ^ „ 

<$> * O h 0 ° 

y> V" * y # °* o. 

[*- \<? *-*# 



A q 


■a.’’ 





* 

O 

r£» v '>Vs~ 3 ^ « <1 l O *■ 

*»To’ # o » 

A,0 V »*V'» *> V* .*•«- o. V) 

‘ AA -'Mfc- ^ 

; A A A A >*• 

<o o ^*.s s A A '° *»* <0 o *<■*«, s .. 

^ o « e A ^ „ t / » # *<J>^ A 0 * « « ^ A^ . t > a „ 

% C U ° — * O ^ 





^ ^ 0^ 


A O 


^ > «<> 


%/ • 

» A A * «i 

** A A-., 




N 

‘ *<Z/1M* ^ ” 7 ^. *. 

' # v. '♦ oTT’ - A A •’* A A'*.;-. ’ 



<^o A * 

• ^WV^AV/XA ° °a> A 

* A ^rv 

* A ^0> 

A" "o (A ^ -’iT^ a " <^ *'o *** 4 .(F * 

+* \. A .^> °o A .v^:* A A /" 

^ :£m£&k< 






'' A 



oi i1 

O V 




a0 

^ ~~z~£ / £slT<? v ^ Q 

^ ^ o«° 0 A V ^ ^ *' 1 * ’ ^ ® N ° 0 A 

^ w * * c'. A v * s *o!L'* v v <» y *°- C' 

y S S&fcf . ^ A ,VvVa % ^ 

* y > '’ ° 


'O.A. 

r>v o w o ^ 4 S^ r <£ k 

o° ,-^>,1% °^ y#MzL'. % 

o .„. 

V A^“ «W|IWSSNX"V- -rt-' <^W/Hj'^' > 

A. A V'*AA* a- a ‘^f‘* .o° 

A **••'» *> <y r - ‘o, %. .o s 

i • ^ av * jA^fr/k° 

h ” ^ • 

V^>- ' *//™» . 


\0 

\ * 

\k* ^ 

- • ' ,U’ ^ 

n A ^ <f> o n o 

.0 V v 


,• g v ‘yw A ^ •- ,f ^^,‘° A A ^ 

A <. *o.a* .<y \d *^v. s % A 

# t I 0 ^ Q > 0 0 N O ^ A , »■ 1 * ^ (A G 0 N 

» f&jffT?** v ^ a^ 55SW# ° A *W^,% v^ , c a^5 


^0“* 


.* ^ 


J. v ’ •’* 4$* o 

v * »»»° a % - 

v v a*°- q* 

► .-Tv ^ ^ 5 


;• A ^ 

_ ^ * <^r o 

A v * ° * 0 0 A ^ 

A v <s * * /- ^ v> A «’ , *°^ c> 























REMARKS 


HON. THOMAS A. JENCKES... 
“ AARON A. SARGENT... 

“ CLINTON L. COBB. 

“ G. A. FINKELNBURG... 

“ HORACE MAYNARD. 

“ JOHN A. BINGHAM. 

“ JOHN A. PETERS. 

“ HALBERT E. PAINE... . 
“ WILLIAM E. NIBLACK 

“ JACOB BENTON. 

“ WILLIAM D. KELLEY.. 
“ ROBERT C. SCHENCK... 
“ SAMUEL P. MORRILL... 


.OF RHODE ISLAND. 

.OF CALIFORNIA. 

.OF NORTH CAROLINA. 
.OF MISSOURI. 

.OF TENNESSEE. - 
.OF OHIO. 

.OF MAINE. 

.OF WISCONSIN. 

.OF INDIANA. 

..OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. 
.OF PENNSYLVANIA. — 
..OF OHIO. 

.OF MAINE. 


DELIVERED 


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 


v MAY 3, 4, AND 5, 1870. 

, 0 - 

C" J f 

> ' 


y<'\' 



WASHINGTON: 

F. & J. RIVES & GEO. A. BAILEY, 

REPORTERS AND PRINTERS OF THE DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 

1870 

















.11 S 

. 

■ ■ 


,{■ -tv :r .. " 


.0- r... , { a v 















r 

/ 


$ 


THE CIVIL SERVICE. 


Tuesday, May 3, 1870. 

The SPEAKER. The morning hour has 
begun, and reports are in order from the se¬ 
lect Committee on the Reorganization of the 
Civil Service of the Government. 

Mr. JENCKES, from the committee just 
named, reported back House bill No. 1354, to 
regulate the civil service of the United States, 
with a substitute. 

The substitute was read. It provides, in the 
first section, that hereafter all appointments 
of civil officers in the several Departments of 
the service of the United States, except post¬ 
masters and such officers as are by law required 
to be appointed by the President, by and with 
the advice and consent of the Senate, shp.ll be 
made from those persons who shall have been 
found best qualified for the performance of the 
duties of the offices to which such appointments 
are to be made, in open and competitive exam¬ 
inations, and after terms of probation, to be 
conducted and regulated as herein prescribed. 

The second section provides that for the 
purpose of carrying into effect the provisions 
of the preceding section the President of the 
United States may appoint in the executive 
department, by and with the advice and con¬ 
sent of the Senate, an officer, to be called the 
commissioner of the civil service, and two 
other officers to be called assistant commis¬ 
sioners of the civil service, who shall sever¬ 
ally hold thfeir offices for the term of five years, 
and who shall constitute the civil service com¬ 
mission, among whose duties shall be the fol¬ 
lowing : first, to prescribe, subject to the ap¬ 
proval of the President of the United States, 
the qualifications requisite for an appointment 
into each branch and grade of the civil service 
of the United States, having regard to the fit¬ 
ness of each candidate in respect to age, health, 
character, knowledge,and ability for the branch 


of service into which he seeks to enter; sec¬ 
ond, to provide, subject to the same approval, 
for the examinations and periods and condi¬ 
tions of probation of all persons eligible under 
this act who may present themselves foradmis- 
sion into the civil service ; third, to establish, 
subject to the same approval, rules governing 
the applications of such persons, the times and 
places of their examinations, the subjects upon 
which such examinations shall be had, with 
other incidents thereof, and the mode of con¬ 
ducting the same, and the manner of keeping 
and preserving the records thereof, and of per¬ 
petuating the evidence of such applications, 
qualifications, examinations, probations, and 
their result, as they shall think expedient. 
Such rules shall be so framed as to keep the 
branches of the civil service and the different 
grades of each branch, as also the records ap¬ 
plicable to each branch, distinct and separate. 
The said commission shall divide the country 
into territorial districts for the purpose of hold¬ 
ing examinations of applicants resident therein 
and others, and shall designate some conven¬ 
ient and accessible place in each district where 
examinations shall be held ; fourth, to exam¬ 
ine personally, or by persons by them specially 
designated, the applicants for appointment into 
the civil service of the United States; fifth, 
to make report of all rules and regulations es¬ 
tablished by them, and of a summary of their 
proceedings, including an abstract of their 
examinations for the different branches of the 
service, annually, to Congress at the opening 
of each session. 

The third section provides that all appoint¬ 
ments to the civil service provided for in this 
act shall be made from those who have passed 
the required examinations and probations in 
the following order and manner: first, the 
applicants who stand highest in order of merit 






4 


on the list of those who have passed the exam¬ 
ination and probation for any particular branch 
and grade of the civil service shall have the 
preference in appointment to that branch and 
grade, and so on, in the order of precedence j 
in examinations and merit during probation, j 
to the minimum degree of merit, fixed by the 
board for such grade ; second, whenever any j 
vacancy shall occur in any grade of the civil j 
service above the lowest in any branch, the j 
senior in the next lower grade may be appointed 
to fill the same, or a new examination for that 
particular vacancy may be ordered under the 
direction of the Department of those in the next 
lower grade, and the person found best quali 
fied shall be entitled to the appointment to fill 
such vacancy, provided that no person now in 
office shall be promoted or transferred from a 
lower to a higher grade unless he shall have 
passed at least one examination under this 
act; third, the right of seniority shall be 
determined by the rank of merit assigned by 
the commission upon the examinations, having 
regard also to the seniority in service; but 
it shall at all times be in the power of the 
heads of Departments to order new examina¬ 
tions, which shall be conducted by the com¬ 
mission, upon due notice, and according to 
fixed rules, and which shall determine senior¬ 
ity with regard to the persons ordered to be 
examined, or in the particular branch and 
grade of the service to which such examina¬ 
tions shall apply; fourth, said commission 
shall have power to establish rules for such 
special examinations, and also rules by which 
any persons exhibiting particular merit in any 
branch of the civil service may be advanced 
one or more points in their respective grades; 
one fourth of the promotions may be made on 
account of merit, irrespective of seniority in 
service, such merit to be ascertained by special 
examinations, or by advancement for merito¬ 
rious services and special fitness for the par¬ 
ticular branch of service, according to rules to 
be established as aforesaid. 

The fourth section provides that said com¬ 
mission shall also have power- to prescribe a 
fee, not exceeding five dollars, to be paid by 
each applicant for examination, and also a fee, 
not exceeding ten dollars, to be paid by each 
person who shall receive a certificate of rec¬ 
ommendation for appointment or for pro¬ 
motion, or of seniority, which fees shall be 
first paid to the collector of internal revenue 
in the district where the applicant or officer 
resides or may be examined, to be accounted 
for and paid into the Treasury of the United 
States by such collector, and the certificates 
of payment of fees to collectors shall be for¬ 
warded quarterly by the commissioners to the 
Treasury Department. 

. The fifth section provides that said commis¬ 
sion shall have power to prescribe, by general 
rules, subject to the approval of the President 


of the United States, what misconduct or inef¬ 
ficiency shall be sufficient for the removal or 
suspension of all officers who come within the 
provisions of this act, and also to establish 
rules for the manner of preferring charges for 
such misconduct or inefficiency, and for the 
trial of the accused, and for determining his 
position pending such trial. Each member of 
said commission shall have the power of ad¬ 
ministering oaths in all proceedings authorized 
by this act, and testimony may be given orally 
by witnesses in any hearing before said com¬ 
mission or any member thereof, or by deposi¬ 
tion to be taken in the manner prescribed by 
law, or upon such notice or in such mannar as 
said commission shall by general rule or special 
order direct. 

The sixth section provides that the commis¬ 
sioner, or either of said assistant commission¬ 
ers, may conduct or superintend any examina¬ 
tions, and they may call to their assistance in 
such examinations such men of learning and 
high character as they may think fit, or, in 
their discretion, such officers in the civil, mil¬ 
itary, or naval service of the United States as 
may be designated from time to time, on ap¬ 
plication of the commission, as assistants to 
said commission, by the President or heads 
of Departments, and in special cases, to be 
fixed by rules or by resolutions of the com¬ 
mission, they may delegate examinations to 
such persons, to be attended and presided over 
by the commissioner, or by either of his as¬ 
sistants, or by some person specially desig¬ 
nated to preside. 

The seventh section provides that the said 
commission may also, upon reasonable notice 
to the person accused, hear and determine 
any case of alleged misconduct or inefficiency, 
under the general rules herein provided for, 
and in such case shall report to the head of 
the proper Department their finding in the mat¬ 
ter, and may recommend the suspension or 
dismissal from office of any person found guilty 
of such misconduct or inefficiency, and such 
person shall be forthwith suspended or dis¬ 
missed by the head of such Department pursu¬ 
ant to such recommendation, and from the 
filing of such report shall receive no compen¬ 
sation for official service except from and after 
the expiration of any term of suspension rec¬ 
ommended by such report. 

The eighth section provides that the Presi¬ 
dent shall have power at any time to revoke 
and cancel the commission of any officer ap¬ 
pointed in pursuance of the provisions of this 
act; provided, however, that said revocation 
and cancellation shall not take effect if said 
officer demand a trial upon charges to be pre¬ 
ferred against him in the manner prescribed 
in this act within thirty days from the time of 
being served with notice of such revocation 
and cancellation, unless he shall be found 
guilty upon his trial of the misconduct or in- 











5 


efficiency alleged against him in such charges. 
The discontinuance of an office shall discharge 
the person holding it from the service. 

The ninth section provides that there shall 
be an inspection of all the officers subject to 
the provisions of this act at intervals of four 
years, and such inspection shall be conducted 
according to rules to be established by said 
commission and approved by the President; 
and upon such inspection all such officers shall 
be subject to reexamination in the discretion 
of the commission, and such officers as may not 
be found to possess the qualifications required 
by the rules and regulations hereinbefore 
authorized to be established shall be rec¬ 
ommended for dismissal, and be dismissed 
accordingly. 

The tenth section provides that the salary 
of said commissioner shall be $G,000 a year, 
and of each of said assistants shall be $5,000 
a year, and the said commission may employ 
a clerk at a salary of $2,500 a year, and a mes¬ 
senger at a salary of $900 a year; and these 
sums and the necessary traveling expenses of 
the commissioner and assistant commissioners, 
clerk, and messenger, to be accounted for in 
detail and verified by affidavit* shall be paid 
from any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
appropriated. The necessary expenses of any 
person employed by said commission as assist¬ 
ants, to be accounted for and verified in like 
manner, and certified by the commission, shall 
also be paid in like manner. 

The eleventh section provides that any offi¬ 
cer in the civil service of the United States at 
the date of the passage of this act, other than 
those excepted in the first section of this act, 
maybe required by the head of the Department 
in which he serves to appear before said com¬ 
mission, and if found not qualified for the place 
he occupies he shall be reported for dismissal, 
and be dismissed in the manner hereinbefore 
provided, and the vacancy shall be filled in 
manner aforesaid from those who may be found 
qualified for such grade of office after such 
examination and probation as is hereinbefore 
prescribed. 

The twelfth section provides that any person 
appointed and commissioned in pursuance of 
the provisions of this act may be required to 
serve in the branch and grade to which he may 
be appointed in any part of the United States 
where the head of the Department in which he 
serves may think proper; and in case of re¬ 
moval from one place of service to another, 
the necessary traveling expenses of such offi¬ 
cer, to be ascertained and allowed according 
to fixed rules, shall be paid out of the Treasury. 

The thirteenth section provides that the heads 
of the several Departments may, in their dis¬ 
cretion, designate the offices in the several 
branches of the civil service the duties of which 
may be performed by females as well as males, 
and for all such offices females as well as males 


shall be eligible, and may make application 
therefor and be examined, recommended, ap¬ 
pointed, tried, suspended, and dismissed in 
manner aforesaid ; and the names of those 
recommended by the examiners shall be placed 
upon the lists for appointment and promotion 
in the order of their merit and seniority, and 
without distinction other than as aforesaid from 
those of male applicants or officers. 

The fourteenth section provides that the 
President, and also the Senate, may require 
any person applying for or recommended for 
any office which requires confirmation by the 
Senate to appear before said commission and 
be examined as to his qualifications, either 
before or after being commissioned ; and the 
result of such examination shall be reported to 
the President and to the Senate. 

Mr. JENOKES. Shall we attempt to im¬ 
prove the character of our civil service ? That 
is the question which this bill proposes in part 
to ansv/er. Its present condition every one is 
aware of; and its inefficiency is not the fault, 
perhaps, of the persons who form that civil 
service, and of those who use it, but arises 
from the defects in the system itself. We hear 
every day of defalcations, of irregularities, of 
inefficiencies, by which the Government loses 
large amounts of money. This has gone on 
for many years. At times the evil seems to 
be less than at others, and occasionally it breaks 
out with great aggravations, showing that it 
constantly exists. Shall we attempt to reform 
these evils? The people have been waiting 
for many years t,o have some proposition of 
this kind enacted into a law or carried out by 
the executive department. None save this 
has been presented. This measure has now 
been substantially before Congress and the 
country for four years. It has met from time 
to time with objections in this House and else¬ 
where, but no one has presented any other 
plan. If we really intend to do anything to 
improve the character of our civil service some 
system should be adopted; and if none better 
is proposed, I still think we should make ex¬ 
periment with this. This measure has been 
discussed so often, and so much at length be¬ 
fore the House and country, that I shall not 
consume the time of the House this morning 
further than to explain the principles and 
details of the bill in such a general way that 
they may be understood. I shall not go into 
any discussion of the condition of the service, 
or into any of the reasons outside of what 
appears on the face of the bill for the proposed 
change. I shall assume that there are evils to 
be corrected. If gentlemen say that there are 
not, I should like to hear them attempt to 
establish the proposition that the civil service 
as it now stands is of a perfect character. 

The scope of this bill includes the minor 
offices of the Government, those which are 
called in the Constitution the inferior offices. 











6 


It does not deal with those who are to be con¬ 
firmed by the Senate or with the postmasters. 
It deals with a lower grade entirely, those who 
are appointed by the heads of Departments. 
They are the eyes and ears and hands of the 
Government, through whom and by whom it 
collects all its revenue, through whom and by 
whom all the business of the Government is 
carried on, and if that portion of the service is 
healthy it is impossible the rest of it shall be 
unsound, if those persons are employed for 
their qualifications and hold their offices by vir¬ 
tue of such qualifications they cannot become 
the tools of those who wouldrob or swindle the 
Government or would demoralize the service 
for their own private benefit. For the purpose 
of securing a better quality of men in these 
offices this bill proposes that under the author¬ 
ity of the President of the United St ates three 
commissioners shall stand at the doorway of 
each Department to ascertain who shall enter 
the public service, and determine the qualifi¬ 
cations of those persons, the term of probation 
during which they shall serve before they receive 
a regular appointment, what their duties shall 
be, and what misconduct or offenses shall be 
sufficient to justify their removal and for which 
they shall be removed, thus securing a better 
quality of men at the outset and raising the tone 
of the service throughout. 

Now, I wish the House to understand, in'the 
first place, that although three commissioners 
are to be appointed, yet in fact there is no crea¬ 
tion of new officers, as they are to take the 
place of some thirty officers now existing, and 
that the expense of this commission, about 
thirty thousand dollars a year, will be less than 
one third—yes, less than one fifth of the money 
which is now paid for performing similar ser¬ 
vices withoutefficiency. There are now appoint¬ 
ment clerks in all the Departments and in all 
the great post offices and custom-houses whose 
united salaries amount to five times as much 
as the expenses of this commission, and all 
these will be dispensed with if this bill becomes 
a law. 

The first quality which these commissioners 
will exclude from the public service will be 
ignorance and incapacity. There are officers 
who are ignorant and incapable in the public 
service. There should not be and there need 
not be any. This examination and inquiry 
into character will necessarily exclude all these 
ignorant and incapable men ; and if there were 
no other benefit, if appointments should still 
be made as they are now, by the heads of De¬ 
partments for political and personal favor, yet it 
were well to see that none are the subjects of 
that favor who are thus disqualified to perforin 
the duties to which they shall be assigned. For 
that alone, if for no other purpose, this commis¬ 
sion would be worth more than it will cost. 

But there are in the service also persons 
who are dishonest, who have been kept in by ! 


favor, and who should not be there, but should 
be excluded ; and the second provision of this 
bill prescribing the duties of these commis¬ 
sioners is to see that no rogue or thief remains 
in the public service. This evil can be ascer¬ 
tained and prevented. It is no new problem. 
In other countries where a system like this has 
been in force we seldom, if ever, hear of any 
defalcations or of any pilfering from the public 
treasury. In the little community of Belgium, 
which has had a separate existence for thirty- 
eight years, and where a system similar to this 
has been in force, there has been but one in¬ 
stance of peculation during all that period, 
because of the scrutiny which is applied to 
officers when admitted and the constant in¬ 
spection which is kept over them while they 
are in the service. It seems to me, therefore, 
to be so clear as to need no further explana¬ 
tion or argument that these two things can be 
attained : first, the admission of none but quali¬ 
fied persons into the service ; and second, the 
exclusion of all dishonest persons. I need 
not tell the House how many millions of dol¬ 
lars it would save this Government every year. 
They know it; they have read it in the reports 
from the heads of Departments, and in the 
reports of committees of this House. They 
read of it every day in the public papers. 

I need not tell the House how much would 
be saved in another way by having efficient 
officers. When I stated to the House in the 
Fortieth Congress that a system of this kind 
would secure an increase of revenue to this 
Government over expenditures of $100,000,- 
000, I placed it at least $50,000,000 below the 
mark. By simply raising the tone of the public 
service, without altering the system of appoint¬ 
ment, this Governraentnowsaves$100,000,000 
a year more than it did under a former Admin¬ 
istration, and is enabled to pay its debt at the 
rate of $100,000,000 annually, and still the 
same causes that caused the deficiency in those 
days remain in force now. I think I place it 
far within the mark when I assure this House 
that if we had fidelity and intelligence in every 
branch of the public service we should raise at 
least $50,000,000 a year more than we do now. 
We should raise more than the Committee of 
Ways and Means propose to reduce from tax¬ 
ation by tariff and internal revenue. Is not 
this a consummation to be desired? Is it not, 
even if not accomplished in full but only in 
part, something that ought to be attempted? 

But it may be asked, what are your means of 
doing this? This is a great country; it has 
a great army of public officers. How can you 
reach every one of these? I answer by a simple 
and, as it seems to me, most effective machinery 
that has been devised for this purpose. It 
is proposed to establish an independent com¬ 
mission, responsible to the President alone, 
reporting every year to Congress. They are 
authorized to employ examiners in all parts of 











7 


the United States. They prescribe the quali¬ 
fications ; they put down in writing the ques¬ 
tions to be submitted to every candidate for 
office. They are propounded to the candi¬ 
dates for office by these examiners, wherever the 
candidates may be. The answers are sent back 
here with the report of these examiners. Now, 
from that preliminary examination we will cer¬ 
tainly obtain one thing—a knowledge of the 
degree of intelligence and learning of each 
candidate. That is one great point that will 
be gained. 

Then, in the next place, through these ex¬ 
aminations in different parts of the country, 
we ascertain the other essentials that are re¬ 
quired—health, profession, character, stand¬ 
ing, and business qualifications of each can¬ 
didate—and thus are enabled to form some 
idea of what he is before he enters the public 
service. But his place is not secure then. He 
is put into a great custom-house, post office, or 
Department, with a chief who will have his eye 
upon him all the time. And if there are defi¬ 
ciencies in respects that were not discovered in 
the preliminary examinations they can then be 
detected. He is there on his good behavior. 
Those under whose eyes he renders service will 
see if there are deficiencies in his other quali¬ 
fications which may render him an unsuitable 
person to remain in the public service. 

Is not this done in every counting-room in 
the land, wherever men who attend to the 
management of their own business employ men 
to assist them to carry it on ? Is there any 
place in this country or in the world where 
persons who are in the employment of another 
are not subject to scrutiny ? And why should 
not those in the employment of the Govern¬ 
ment be subject to the same scrutiny? _ Why 
have not the people the right to obtain the 
best talent and most efficient services for the 
money they pay for that purpose? Who will 
deny that the people have the right, in the 
employment of these minor servants or offi¬ 
cers, to obtain the most suitable persons to 
perform those duties ? That is a right which 
belongs to them, and which they should be 
provided with the means of exercising. 

In the second place, the people have the 
right to have all the ignorant and incapable, 
the thievish and dishonest excluded from their 
employment. That is all that is proposed by 
this bill, and it is secured without any addi¬ 
tional expenditure. I have compared the ex¬ 
penditures which will be required by this bill 
with that now almost wasted upon these ap¬ 
pointment clerks. There is a provision in this 
bill that a fee shall be paid by each applicant 
for examination, which will more than meet 
the expenses of the commission. We have 
thus devised a scheme by which, without addi¬ 
tional expense to the Government, we can 
obtain an approximation to these two bene¬ 
ficial results which I have stated. Now, in 


order that this system shall work harmoni¬ 
ously, it is necessary that It shall be put into 
operation without any shock or sudden change. 
This bill, therefore, does not propose to alter 
the relations of the existing officers with the 
heads of their Departments ; but it applies to 
such only as shall hereafter be appointed. This 
country will be divided into districts for the 
purpose of selecting candidates, and no pre¬ 
cedence or priority is to be given to one dis¬ 
trict or one part of the country over another. 
The doors are to be open equally to all, and a 
certain number of persons are to be selected 
by this machinery from the whole people. The 
candidates are to be permitted to come forward 
freely. 

The result will be that the supply will be pro¬ 
portioned to the demand. A Government, like 
a corporation or an individual, should be at 
liberty to go into the open labor market of the 
country and select the best; not by favoritism, 
by political or personal favor, or by locality, but 
from the whole mass of the people. It may be 
said that this is to some extent done now. We 
have endeavored to ascertain the truth in the 
matter by examinations of heads of Depart¬ 
ments, and examinations of leading officers of 
great custom-houses. I wish to read a few 
lines from the testimony of an officer in the 
New York custom-house, who gives us the 
character of these examinations, so that mem¬ 
bers may see what sort of chance there is now 
of securing fitness in the minor offices. “ The 
examination,” he says, “is not especially 
severe, nor can it be; for what can you say to 
a man who tells you, ‘ Sir, I know nothing 
about the business at all?’ You cannot ask 
such a man whether he ever discharged a ves¬ 
sel. Perhaps he never saw a vessel.” 

Such is a custom-house examination. We all 
know what these examinations are in the De¬ 
partments here under the act of 1853. Some¬ 
times they are very rigorous, for the purpose 
of excluding a person who happens not to be a 
favorite; and sometimes they are as idle as a 
custom-house examination in New York. 

But I am met just here with another diffi¬ 
culty existing in the mind of almost every one. 
When we speak of the civil service of the 
United States this body of persons employed 
here in the Departments at once rises up before 
us. They are around us all the time. We 
hear their grievances. They would have us 
legislate as if they are the only civil servants of 
this Government that needed looking out for. 
I care nothing at all for this body of persons. 
They do not handle the public money. They 
simply write for the heads of Departments; 
they do the clerkly duty of the Government. 
The officers whom I wish to reach are those in 
the great custom-houses, in the revenue ser¬ 
vice of the Government all along the frontier 
and over the whole land, the officers through 
whom we collect and disburse $300,000,000 








8 


every year, and through whose inefficiency we 
lost at one time at least $150,000,000 every year. 
And this results not so much from the dis¬ 
honesty of these men as from their ignorance 
and incapacity. What can you expect of an 
inspector of customs who never saw a vessel and 
is appointed to the duty of discharging a great 
steamer or even a vessel of the smallest size? 
He knows nothing about a vessel or a cargo. 
When a change of officers is made, and such 
men are put in, the smugglers who have been 
lying in wait run their cargoes through in our 
great ports under the very eyes and noses of 
these incapables. I asked the witness whose 
testimony 1 have been reading what it costs 
this Government to make an entire sweep of 
the revenue officers in the city of New York. 
He answered, “At least $10,000,000 and he 
accounted for it. He said that there is very 
little smuggling of the sort that we usually 
hear or read about, but that these persons who 
wish to get in their goods clandestinely—all for¬ 
eigners, all enemies of the Government—watch 
their chance, and while the change is being 
made the goods pile in. The duties are appar¬ 
ently increased; but for the amount of goods 
that pay duties about one third of the cor¬ 
responding amount are brought in without the 
payment of duties. While these ignorant in¬ 
spectors are looking out for dutiable goods, 
those upon which the importers wish to pay 
duties, the others are smuggled in. That is 
the way we lose from having such a class of 
men to look after our revenues. 

One of the collectors of the city of New York, 
who held his office about two years, made four 
hundred appointments in two hundred and 
forty offices, the inspectors and night-watch¬ 
men of that port. What chance had these men 
to learn their business, what chance even to 
become acquainted with men doing business 
at the custom-house? Of course that was a 
grand holiday for smugglers. Now, I beg gen¬ 
tlemen to exclude altogether from their minds 
this body of clerks in this city. We are not 
aiding or striking at them. They already 
hold their offices. If this bill becomes a law 
they will not be removed, unless on reexamin¬ 
ation they should be dismissed for want of 
efficiency. The bill refers mainly to this other 
class of officers scattered through the country, 
of which there are some twenty thousand 

Mr. PETERS. Will the gentleman permit 
me to ask him a question at this point? Does 
this bill include all assessors, assistant assess¬ 
ors, and collectors of internal revenue? 

Mr. JENCKES. It includes the assistants. 

Mr. PETERS. And all assistants in cus¬ 
tom-houses and all deputy marshals and clerks 
under the judiciary system of the U nited States ? 

Mr. JENCKES. All officers whose appoint¬ 
ments do not require confirmation by the Sen¬ 
ate—the minor officers, but not clerks of courts. 
Mr. PETERS. I wish to say that if this 


bill applied solely to the Departments here in 
Washington I should be glad to go for it; but 
I cannot reconcile myself to such a revolution 
as the gentleman seems to propose, which 
might put a Democrat or perhaps a rebel in 
high office under a Republican administration. 

Mr. JENCKES. It does not contemplate 
any such thing. If the gentleman will look at 
it carefully he will see that it does not 

Mr. PETERS. Cannot the gentleman from 
Tennessee put a rebel into office as collector 
of the internal revenue under this bill ? 

Mr. JENCKES. Of course not. 

Mr. PETERS. Why not? 

Mr. JENCKES. Because these commis¬ 
sioners are to prescribe the qualification of 
these officers, and every officer has to take the 
oath of office, which would cut out any such 
person as the gentleman refers to. 

Mr. PETERS. Political qualification ? 

Mr. JENCKES. That is the prescription. 
There is no more possibility of appointing a 
rebel than a Chinaman. 

Mr. PETERS. Will the gentlemau allow 
me to ask him another question? 

Mr. JENCKES. Certainly. 

Mr. PETERS. Cannot a man with his 
hands dripping with the blood of the Union 
soldier, shed during the rebellion, go before 
this board of examiners, and if he passes the 
examination will he not under this bill be 
entitled to an office? 

Mr. JENCKES. Cannot the gentleman from 
Maine read the English language? 

Mr. PETERS. I can. 

Mr. JENCKES. There is nothing of the 
kind in the bill. Does he suppose that the 
President of the United States would appoint 
such a man, or that these commissioners would 
allow this thing to be done? If any President 
should do such a thing he should be impeached 
for it. 

Mr. PETERS. I will go further. I would 
not only not have a rebel, but I would not have 
a Democrat in any high office in any custom¬ 
house, or in any collection district of internal 
or external revenue. 

Mr. JENCKES. No high office is within 
the scope of this bill. 

Mr. PETERS. They are all high offices. 

Mr. BECK. The gentleman from Maine 
would not care how many thieves are in office. 
So they are Republicans he does not care. He 
would not have a single Democrat. 

Mr. PETERS. We have no such things in 
the Republican party. 

Mr. BECK. That certainly is a new dis¬ 
covery. 

Mr. JENCKES. 1 protest against bringing 
into this discussion these political elements. 
They do not belong here. 1 believe, if clothed 
with this power, these commissioners will use 
it properly. I ask the gentleman from Maine 
what is there now in the way of the President, 













9 


as he expresses it, appointing a rebel, whose 
hands are dripping with the blood of Union 
soldiers ? 

Mr. PETERS. His honesty would pre¬ 
vent it. 

Mr. JENCKES. Is he going to lose his hon¬ 
esty because we clothe him with this power? 

Mr. PE l’ERS. Will the gentleman allow me 
to ask him another question? 

Mr. JENCKES. Certainly. 

Mr. PETERS. I see the thirteenth section 
provides that the President may require any 
person applying for an office which requires 
the confirmation of the Senate to appear before 
this board and be examined as to his qualifica¬ 
tions. Would not that cover this case, that the 
President could have ordered Judge St rong, of 
Pennsylvania, and Mr. Bradley, of New Jer¬ 
sey, before this board of examiners to undergo 
examination as to their fitness for the positions 
to which they have been appointed on the bench 
of the Supreme Court of the United States? 

Mr. JENCKES. I will answer that ques¬ 
tion by asking another. Is there anything in 
the law of the United States now to prevent the 
President of the United States from calling 
before him any person whom he chooses to 
appoint to office to examine him as to his 
qualifications? 

Mr. PETERS. That is a Yankee way of 
“dodging” the question. 

Mr. JENCKES. No, sir; it is a Yankee 
way of meeting it. The more gentlemen at¬ 
tempt to cover up the more they expose the 
nakedness of the present system. I do not 
suppose this measure will meet all the evils of 
the present system. The wit of man cannot 
devise a system that will. The most we can 
do is to take a step in the right direction. That 
is all we propose here. When the gentleman 
says that certain things may be done under this 
bill I say the same things are done in a more 
flagrant manner under the present system, or 
rather want of system. 

Mr. ELA. Gentlemen have talked of rascal¬ 
ities in office. I ask whether the corruptions 
and rascalities in office have not been on the 
part of those who have been long in office, and 
whether the frauds have not been detected by 
the recent appointments? 

Mr. JENCKES. I thank the gentleman for 
the question. In the recentcase in New York if 
the minor officers had felt secure in their places, 
and had been appointed on account of their 
qualifications, the defaulting collector never 
would have had their signatures to his state 
ments. They never would have made false en¬ 
tries in their books, or suffered omissions which 
concealed falsehoods. It would not be possi¬ 
ble for any of these great thieves to take the 
money from the public Treasury in the way 
they have done without the knowledge of their 
subordinates. There is no instance in which 
it has ever been done by one of these thieves 


alone and unaided. He cannot put his hand 
into the public chest, take the money, and go. 
off; there must be an entry in the books. So 
long as he holds these minor officers in tin; hol¬ 
low of his hand, so long will these great pecu¬ 
lations continue possible. When t his is put an 
end to, then this thing can be done no longer. 
The mode provided in the bill is the mode we 
propose for putting an end to all these stealing 
practices. 

Mr. BENTON. Does the gentleman hold 
that the President of the United States should 
appoint to these minor offices ? 

Mr. JENCKES. No; but we hold that he 
should cause inquiry to be made as to the quali¬ 
fications of the persons appointed. 

Mr. BENTON. I would ask the gentleman 
whether, if it is important to have an exam¬ 
ination. as to the qualifications of the minor 
officers, it is not much more important to have 
such an examination with reference to the 
qualifications of the higher officers? 

Mr. JENCKES. That is a matter within 
the discretion of the President. 

Mr. BENTON. Is there any argument ap¬ 
plicable to these officers which does not apply 
to every public officer in the United States? 

Mr. JENCKES. The argument is as strong 
as the proportion of the numbers. There are 
twenty-three thousand of these officers, and 
four thousand of the other class. Make the 
basis right, safe, and secure, and we will be 
answerable for the superstructure. 

Mr. BENTON. Does not the gentleman’s 
argument apply equally well to every member 
of this House, and to every member of the 
Government? 

Mr. JENCKES. The gentleman represents 
a constituency who are answerable for the kind 
of men they send here, and are able to judge 
of his qualifications without our providing for 
boards of examiners. I think he will admit 
that they give him a pretty severe questioning 
every two years. 

Mr. BENTON. My objection to this bill is 
that it takes power from the hands of the 
people to place it in the hands of a board or 
commission. And I hold that the more you 
remove power from the hands of the people the 
less democratic your Government becomes. 

Mr. JENCKES. I thank the gentleman for 
his interruption ; for if ever there was a more 
democratic measure presented to any Con¬ 
gress or any Legislature in the world than this 
is I would like to have it described. Why, 
the door is open to all; exclusion is for inca¬ 
pacity and inefficiency alone. Instead of taking 
away power from the people, it gives it directly 
to the people, who will stand by and see that 
in these appointments justice is done to all. 
Now, when a person gets an appointment, 
who know the machinery by which it has been 
gained? What do the people know about it? 
They see the. man in office, but they know 











10 


nothing whatever of the means by which he 
got there. 

Mr. COX. Will the gentleman from Rhode 
Island yield to me for a moment? 

Mr. JENCKES. Certainly. 

Mr. COX. We are all interested in this dis¬ 
cussion, and desire to have a thorough under¬ 
standing of the matter. I have not yet heard 
any explanation from the gentleman as to the 
constitutional point which enters into thisques- 
tion. It seems to me that a doubt arises under 
the second section of the second article of the 
Constitution. I need not read the clause, but 
I should like to hear what the gentleman from 
Rhode Island [Mr. Jenckes] has to say in 
regard to it, as there are many who doubt not j 
merely the propriety but the constitutionality i 
of passing a bill which places the appointments 
under the control of a commission, believing 
that the Constitution comprehends all appoint¬ 
ments under our Government, and places them 
in the hands of the President, with the confirm¬ 
ation of the Senate, and the minor offices with 
the courts of law, the President alone, and 
heads of Departments. 

Mr. JENCKES. The gentleman will see 
that this does not conflict with the Constitu- i 
tion. The appointments to these minor offices 
are made by heads of Departments. All that 
this bill says is that the heads of Departments 
shall not appoint a person who has been ascer¬ 
tained to be incapable, or who is known to be 
vicious. The same rule is now applied to the 
Army and Navy, where every one is examined 
before he can get a commission. The Presi¬ 
dent has no right to take a cadet from West 
Point and make him a major general. . Ap¬ 
pointments must be made according to law. 
And in this case the commissioners must ex¬ 
ercise their powers according to law. If any 
appointing power were given to this commis¬ 
sion the gentleman’s point would be a good 
one. But the bill carefully guards against 
their exercising any appointing power. These 
regulations are to be applied to the Depart¬ 
ments, and appointments will be made as here¬ 
tofore, but only from the class of persons 
found to be competent. Nor do I suppose, 
Mr. Speaker, that all of those classes of per¬ 
sons who may be examined will receive com¬ 
missions. I do not suppose that one in ten 
will. But men will go before the commission 
for the purpose of getting certificates of char¬ 
acter and ability. It will raise the standard of 
education throughout the country. Here will 
be something to which everybody will strive 
to attain. It will be open to the children of 
the poor equally as to the children of the rich; 
to a person with a common-school education 
as well as to one who has passed through a 
university. Every one will have the same 
chance of entering the public service and of 
promotion as the nephew of a Senator. 

Mr. COX. If I understand the gentleman 


right, notwithstanding this commission, not¬ 
withstanding this competitive examination, 
notwithstanding this very bill, the heads of 
Departments can appoint as they choose. 

Mr. JENCKES. Not at all. They can 
appoint from this class, just as the Secretary 
of the Navy appoints midshipmen from the 
Academy at Annapolis from the class of those 
who stand an examination. It is precisely a 
parallel case. 

Mr. SARGENT. Will the gentleman yield 
j to me for a moment? I would like to offer an 
j amendment. 

Mr. JENCKES. I wish to explain a little 
further, and then I will yield. 

Mr. ELA. I dislike to interrupt the gentlc- 
i man, but I desire to ask him a question. 

Mr. JENCKES. It is no interruption. 

Mr. ELA. I would ask the gentleman if all 
this class of officers, the assistant collectors 
j and assessors and the inspectors in the custom- 
I houses, do not hold their appointments from 
j the Secretary of the Treasury, and if they are 
not to that extent independent of' the officers 
he speaks of? 

i Mr. JENCKES. Some of them, as the 
i gentleman well knows, are appointed on the 
nomination of the assessors and collectors. 

Mr. ELA. But having been appointed upon 
the recommendation of the assessors and col¬ 
lectors, are they not entirely within the con¬ 
trol of the Secretary of the Treasury and 
protected in all their efforts to ferret out frauds 
j and save the Government? 

! Mr. JENCKES. It is not so as a matter of 
j fact, because if the chief officer, the collector or 
assessor, or collector of customs, recommends 
a subordinate for dismissal he is removed ; he 
has no right to stand against his chief; and 
therein is the cause of all this iniquity. When 
there is a chief in the custom-house who wishes 
to lay his hand on the public money, and he 
has a clerk under him who will detect him and 
report him, that clerk is quietly removed upon 
the recommendation of the chief. What this 
bill intends is to save the honest deputy and 
expose and remove the dishonest collector. 

Mr. ELA. I think the great trouble with 
this bill would be that it would fill the Depart¬ 
ments with educated incompetency, while force 
and capacity for the real duties of office would 
be ignored. 

Mr. JENCKES. We should obtain intelli¬ 
gence and excludeignorance. Is it not better 
to do that? The incompetency that the gen¬ 
tleman speaks of cannot exist, for the reason 
that no man can perform the duties of an office 
for a year without exposing his incompetency. 
How can he serve out his period of probation 
without disclosing his fitness or unfitness ? 

Mr. ELA. How do incompetent men remain 
in the Army and Navy? 

Mr. JENCKES. A man totally incompetent 
cannot. Charges would be preferred against 


















11 


him, and he would be tried and removed. One 
of the vices of the present system is that we 
appoint a man first and attempt to educate 
him afterward without knowing whether he 
can ever be educated at all. We appoint him 
without any inquiry. An inspector in New 
York is assigned to the duty of discharging 
a ship who has never seen a ship in his life. I 
examined one myself who told me he had 
never been on shipboard until he was brought 
down from the interior to be an inspector on 
the wharves of New York. The bill meets these 
objections by another proposition, which gen¬ 
tlemen have notread the bill sufficiently care¬ 
fully to see. It provides for excluding incom¬ 
petent persons in the first instance, and then 
they may be excluded by abolishing the offices 
which they hold, or the President may revoke 
any commission, and oblige the officer to seek 
redress by demanding an investigation. And in 
the third place, every one of these officers may 
be complained of for inefficiency and be tried 
and removed, and no really incompetent person 
against whom such a complaint is made will 
go to a trial; his resignation will be offered as 
soon as the charge is made. With a view to 
further security, the committee have proposed 
an additional section which requires an inspec¬ 
tion and reexamination of all these officers 
once in four years, when the inefficient can be 
weeded out and the good officers retained. 
Gentlemen know very well that some of the 
officers in the large custom-houses are never 
turned out. There is an officer in the New 
York custom-house who has been there for 
thirty years. There is a deputy surveyor who 
has been there for seventeen years. These are 
the men who do the business of the Govern¬ 
ment at that port; and it is for the purpose 
of getting that same class of men in greater 
numbers into the service, and of keeping them 
there, that this proposition is made to Congress 
for its action. 

Mr. JONES, of Kentucky. Will the gen¬ 
tleman allow me a moment? 

Mr. JENCKES. Certainly. 

Mr. JONES, of Kentucky. If I rightly 
apprehend the statement of the gentleman—a 
portion of his exposition of this bill I have not 
been able to hear—I understand this bill to 
provide for an examining commission, or a 
bureau of examination, who are to examine 
all the persons applying for office, to see if 
they are competent to discharge the duties of 
the offices for which they apply, and also to 
discover and report those persons in office now 
who are not competent to discharge those 
duties. 

Mr. JENCKES. That is the general scope 
of the bill. 

Mr. SARGENT. I desire to move an addi¬ 
tional section to this bill. 

Mr. JENCKES. I will hear it read. 


The proposed section was read, as follows : 

Sec. 14. Andbe it further enacted. That hereafter it 
shall be unlawful for any member of either House 
of Congress or Delegate from a Territory, verbally or 
in writing, to solicit, recommend, or advise the Pres¬ 
ident of the United States, or any head of a Depart¬ 
ment, or of any bureau thereof, to appoint any per¬ 
son tooffice or employment; and it shall be unlawful 
for the President or any head of a Department or 
bureau to make any appointment so solicited, rec¬ 
ommended, or advised on the privity of the appli¬ 
cant ; and any person who shall violate this act shall 
be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on convic¬ 
tion thereof shall be fined not exceeding $1,000: Pro¬ 
vided , That this act. shall not apply to the action of 
Senators upon nominations submitted by the Presi¬ 
dent to the Senate. 

Mr. PETERS. I would suggest to the 
gentleman to make the punishment hanging. 

Mr. SARGENT. I should like to explain 
my amendment briefly. As it is entirely con¬ 
sistent with the bill, does not injure it in any 
feature whatever, but effects a great reform, I 
trust the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. 
Jenckes] who has charge of the bill will 
allow it to be considered as pending. I appeal 
to members of the House if it is not one of 
the greatest curses of the position of a member 
of Congress that there are continual demands 
made on his time and patience by persons 
whom it is utterly impossible for him to sat¬ 
isfy, who demand that he shall secure office 
for them. The enemies we make are disap¬ 
pointed office-seekers almost exclusively. Half 
a dozen men apply for the same place, and but 
one can get it. If a member conscientiously 
selects one in his judgment the best fitted all 
the rest become liis bitter enemies, and he 
makes a lukewarm friend of the one that he 
serves. Though a member may come here and 
work diligently and faithfully during his whole 
term in Congress, though he make himself 
illustrious by originating and securing the 
passage ot' measures beneficial to his people 
and to the whole country, still the crowd of 
disappointed office-seekers in his district cast 
their grievances in the scale against his useful¬ 
ness, and by their clamors and slanders injure 
his reputation more than all his enlightened 
labors can redeem. Why should we not free 
ourselves from this bondage? Why not do as 
we once did in the matter of contracts, put it 
out of the power of Congressmen to recom¬ 
mend them? We are here for higher duties 
than to be the unthanked messengers of quar¬ 
reling selfishness, when, whatever the result 
of our exertions, we multiply enemies, and 
when those exertions take precious time that 
belongs to the whole people. 

But my amendment goes further than this. 
It strikes at an abuse that has grown up in the 
United States Senate, or at any rate at ail 
abuse of which some Senators have been guilty. 
There is a greed for controlling office in some 
few Senators that is perfectly amazing. All 
measures of practical legislation are subor- 












12 


dinated, neglected by such, that some unworthy 
henchman may have place, or that somebody 
may admire a Senator’s power, or that “mile¬ 
stones may be set up here and there in a 
State. ” It has been gravely alleged by a Sen¬ 
ator that it is unconstitutional for the Presi¬ 
dent or the head of a Department to take any 
advice as to appointments except from a Sen¬ 
ator of the State in which the appointment is 
made, because the Constitution says “the 
President shall nominate, and by and with the 
advice of the Senate appoint.” Of course this 
is mere puerility, but it shows the tendency of 
the order of things that I wish to correct. 
When Senators assume that the President has 
no right to call upon a Representative for 
advice, and that Senators only shall have the 
executive ear, it is time to prescribe a rule 
that will lead the Senate back to its constitu¬ 
tional duty of advising and consenting to ap¬ 
pointments after nominations shall have been 
made. I know there is too much good sense 
in the Senate for this absurd doctrine to prevail 
where the attention of the Senate is directed 
to the assumption. But confirmations and 
rejections are made in secret session, and I 
know of men of high fitness being rejected 
because a Senator did not recommend them, 
and men notoriously unfit being confirmed from 
the impossibility of getting the truth to the ear 
of the Senate where the Senators interested 
could intercept it. Under the present custom 
in the Senate it is almost impossible for a 
united House delegation to get a good man ' 
confirmed if the Senators from the State pre¬ 
fer a bad one; in other words, Senators secure 
the rejection of those that the President has 
constitutionally nominated, not because 'they 
are not fit for the place in question, but because 
they did not themselves recommend them. 

Now, sir, such action on the part of Sen¬ 
ators I believe to be unconstitutional. The 
oath of a Senator implies that he will act in 
such matters from higher motives, and such 
was the intention of the Constitution. I de¬ 
sire to do no injustice to the Senate. There 
are many Senators, nearly all of them, who 
act from nobler motives than those I have 
named, and who have occasionally frowned 
down the practice in question ; but they are 
often entrapped into injustice under the pres¬ 
ent system, and do not always know how un¬ 
worthy are the motives of those with whom 
they associate. I say, sir, that the motive is 
unworthy of any Senator who uses his position 
to defame a good man or disgrace him by a re¬ 
jection in a Senate of his party merely because 
that Senator did not recommend his appoint¬ 
ment. Now, it would be very much better to 
take it out of the pow r er of Senators to abuse 
their position by seeking to control these ap¬ 
pointments ; and it would be infinitely better 
for members of this House if they could throw 


off this influence and stand aloof from this 
scramble for office, and devote their time and 
attention to the important duties of their posi¬ 
tion. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

The SPEAKER. The morning hour has 
expired. 


Wednesday, May 4, 1870. 

Mr. FINKELNBURG. I ask the gentle¬ 
man from Rhode Island to yield to me to offer 
two amendments to the bill. 

Mr. JENCKES. I will hear them. 

Mr. FINKELNBURG. Mr. Speaker, I wish 
to say that I am friendly to the main objects 
of this bill. I believe a change in the mode 
of appointing men to the civil service so as to 
make it depend less on congressional influence 
and more on qualification is desirable. But 
there are two features in this bill to which I am 
opposed. The first one is part of section three, 
which provides that appointments shall be 
made from the applicants who stand highest 
in the order of merit. Now, I believe that 
that is refining too much on this system ; that 
all those who have been found qualified for the 
position should stand upon an equal footing ; 
and that if you make it otherwise the commis¬ 
sion practically will be able to designate who 
shall be appointed by stating that any one, two, 
or three are best qualified, and thereby narrow¬ 
ing the limits, so a3 to make necessary the 
appointment of those one, two, or three, who¬ 
ever they may be. Therefore the first amend¬ 
ment I have prepared has reference to this 
point, and I send it to the desk to be read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

On page 3 of the bill, section three, strike out 
all the said section down to the word “ whenever.” 
in the eleventh line, and insert the following : 

That all appointments to the civil service provided 
for in this act shall be made from those who havo 

assed the required examination and probation, and 

ave been found qualified for the particular branch 
and grade of the civil service in which the appoint¬ 
ments are to be made. 

Mr. FINKELNBURG. Mr. Speaker, the 
adoption of that amendment would put all 
those who have passed an examination and 
been found qualified on an equal footing. The 
second amendment strikes out another feature 
of the bill. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that the 
heads of Departments, or at least the Presi¬ 
dent of the United States, ought to possess 
the power of removal withoutthe examination, 
trial, and judgment of this board of commis¬ 
sioners. In other words, I believe that the 
discipline and inefficiency of the service require 
that the inferior officer should be responsible 
directly to his superior, and not to an outside 
tribunal. To expect the President of the 
United States or the head of a Department to 
! appear as an accuser or prosecutor before 















13 


this commission is, to my mind, to expect 
what would be impracticable and improper. 
They would probably submit to almost any¬ 
thing rather than subject themselves to so dis¬ 
agreeable and difficult a process. Just as in 
any common business of life an employ^ is 
responsible to his employer alone, so I would 
like to see the inferior officer responsible to 
his superior officer. I will say further, before 
closing, that there are times of great national 
emergency, such as we had in 18G1, when a 
total, thorough, and prompt overhauling of the 
entire civil service may be necessary to the 
interests of good government and to the very 
existence of the nation itself. And there should 
be a power of removal without going through 
the formalities of this bill. L send to the 
Clerk’s desk the second amendment which 1 
have prepared. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Amend, on page G, section seven, by adding the fol¬ 
lowing proviso: 

Provided, That nothing in this act contained shall 
deprive the President of the United States and the 
heads of Departments from suspending, dismissing, 
or revoking the commission of any officer appointed 
under this act in cases where they have such power 
under existing laws. 

Mr. JENCKES. I accept those amend¬ 
ments, to be considered as pending. I now 
yield to the gentleman from North Carolina, 
[Mr. Cobb.] 

Mr. COBB, of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, 
how much of the time of the gentleman from 
Rhode Island [Mr. Jenckes] remains? 

The SPEAKER. Five minutes. 

Mr. COBB, of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, 
it would be impossible for me in that limited 
time to submit the arguments which I had in¬ 
tended to address to the House on the pending 
bill. I had proposed not to discuss the details 
of the measure, which were explained yester¬ 
day by the gentleman from Rhode Island, [Mr. 
Jenckes,] but to go into the discussion of its 
general merits, in connection with the question 
which the gentleman so pertinently put to the 
House: whether we were ready to reform the 
civil service of this Government? 

I also intended to submit, with the consent 
of the gentleman from Rhode Island, an amend¬ 
ment which I have prepared, and which is not 
designed in anyway to antagonize the bill. I 
desire to state that I am heartily in favor of the 
provisions of the bill. I have become con¬ 
vinced, from my short experience here as a 
member of Congress, that a reform is needed. 
My observation, slight as it has been, has con¬ 
vinced me that the tendency of the present sys¬ 
tem is demoralizing and that the whole organ¬ 
ization of the civil service of the country stands 
in need of reform, and is in fact, I might almost 
say, a disgrace to the genius of this Govern¬ 
ment. I am sustained in this conclusion by 
the evidence of officers of the Government, 
strengthened by the opinions of the leading 


men of the United States and the leading gen¬ 
tlemen who are the heads of Departments. 

Now, sir, the question is this: is the Congress 
of the United States inclined to adopt this bill, 
perfecting it if necessary to meet all the re¬ 
quirements of the case? Is it prepared to take 
an initial step toward the reorganization of the 
civil service; or shall we go to our homes with 
the humiliating confession that we saw an evil, 
that we recognized and appreciated its propor¬ 
tions, that we knew it did exist, and yet had not 
the courage to meet it and apply the remedy? 

Now, Mr. Speaker, there are three great 
evils or defects in the civil-service system in 
this country which are sought to be met by the 
bill under consideration. The first is the usurp¬ 
ation by members of Congress, by the legis¬ 
lative branch of the Government, of the func¬ 
tions of the Executive ; another is the lack of 
qualifications in the applicants for these civil 
offices; and the third is the uncertainty of their 
tenure. These are all sought to be met by this 
bill, and they are met by the bill. As I have 
said, perfection is not attainable at once, but 
improvements will from time to time suggest 
themselves after the initial step is taken, aud 
we may hope in a few years to attain to that 
precision and accuracy in the organization of 
our civil government which obtain in the mon¬ 
archies of Europe. Now, Mr. Speaker, I be¬ 
lieve my time has nearly expired, and the gen¬ 
tleman from Rhode Island cannot yield to me 
further. I ask the Clerk to read an amend¬ 
ment, in the nature of an additional section, 
which I propose to offer at the proper time. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

And be it further enacted. That the commission shall 
cause to bo prepared the number of employes of all 
grades required in the Departments at Washington, 
and that in the appointments to the same an equal 
number shall be given to each of the congressional 
districts of the States and Territories: Provided, how¬ 
ever, If there be no applicant from a congressional 
district from which a vacancy is to be filled, the head 
of the Department may supply the same from can¬ 
didates at large, having due regard to fitness, char¬ 
acter, &c. 

Mr. COBB, of North Carolina. Now, Mr. 
Speaker, in case this bill passes and becomes 
a law, and there is to be a reform in the civil 
service, I say, then let these offices be open to 
the youth of the country. Just now there is 
an unjust and illiberal discrimination against 
many of the States of this Union in the distri¬ 
bution of these offices in and around Washing¬ 
ton city. I have taken pains to have caused 
to be prepared a statement showing how un¬ 
justly and unfairly my own State and other 
States in the South have been treated, not by 
the Administration, not by the heads of De¬ 
partments, but by the iniquitous operation of 
the present system, and I would be glad to 
read it. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. MAYNARD obtained the floor. 

Mr. COBB, of North Carolina. I hope the 













14 


gentleman from Tennessee will allow me five 
minutes. 

Mr. MAYNARD. ThegentlemanfromNortli 
Carolina appeals to me to allow liim five min¬ 
utes. I am perfectly willing to yield to him 
if the House is willing to give him the time, 
but I have so arranged with other gentlemen 
who desire to participate in this discussion 
that I cannot yield any portion of my own 
time. If the House is willing to extend the 
gentleman’s time I have no objection. 

Mr. COBURN. I hope unanimous consent 
will be given to the gentleman from North Car¬ 
olina to proceed, hie does not often trouble 
the House. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ten¬ 
nessee [Mr. Maynard] proposes to yield five 
minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina, 
[Mr. Cobb,] provided it does not come out of 
his hour. Is there objection ? " 

Mr. KELSEY. I object. 

Mr. MAYNARD. Mr. Speaker, I cannot 
help thinking that the defects in the civil ser¬ 
vice have been a good deal overestimated. 
Incompetence, general worthlessness, there 
undoubtedly is—more of it than any of us 
would wish or desire to see. But from my 
observation I am compelled to believe that 
downright, painstaking, intelligent honesty 
predominates; that usefulness is the unob¬ 
served rule, and that worthlessness is the much 
observed exception. I think we may present 
the civil service in a favorable light, as com¬ 
pared with the service in private employment 
throughout the country; for I venture to say 
that where there has been defalcation in the 
public service there has been a great deal more 
among cashiers, tellers, clerks, accountants, 
book-keepers, conductors, ticket agents, and 
other employes of our large corporations.and 
of our private establishments. I am inclined 
to think that if we could get perfect wisdom 
and perfect honesty another form of Govern¬ 
ment than ours might, perhaps, be the best— 
a Government of one man; but in the present 
state of things we do not find that element: we 
find nowhere perfect wisdom or perfect hon¬ 
esty. We are obliged to take men as they are. 
And I think a great deal has been set down 
against the civil service of this country which 
is properly chargeable to our common human 
nature. 

"When we organized our Government the 
problem attempted to be solved was to pro¬ 
duce the best form of stable government with 
the minimum of virtue and intelligence. And 
for that purpose we made the people the basis 
of all power, and required the various officers 
of the Government to go back to the people, 
and to be kept near to them. We ourselves 
have to face the people once in every two 
years; our associates in the Senate once in 
every six years; the executive officers, and 
indirectly all the officers of the civil service, 


once in every four years. It is not an idle 
figure of rhetoric, it is not a wild scream of 
the American eagle, to say, as has been said 
a thousand times, that we have the best Gov¬ 
ernment the world ever saw. 

This bill proposes to remove the officers of 
the civil service one step, and a very long step, 

| further from the people by interposing between 
the President and Congress on the one hand, 
and the civil service on the other, a council 
of four men who are to be charged with the 
whole supervision of the civil service, without 
whose behest no man can be appointed, with¬ 
out whose permission no man can be removed. 
Now, this council of four is to be removable, 
or is not to be removable, at the pleasure of 
the Executive. Upon that point the bill is 
silent, and I did not observe that the gentle¬ 
man from Rhode Island [Mr. Jenckes] in the 
general debate on this bill gave us any opinion 
on this point. If he did I did not hear it. 

Mr. JENCKES. They come under the gen¬ 
eral law. 

Mr. MAYNARD. If they are removable, 
then you will have a convenient shelter behind 
which a weak or unprincipled Executive may 
retire and shelter himself from public respons¬ 
ibility. If they are not removable, then you 
will have a power which will be above the Pres¬ 
ident, above the Senate, and above the people. 
You will have four men with authority over 
twenty-three thousand subordinate officers, not 
amenable to the people, to reach whom I can 
see no method which can be devised by the 
people or their Representatives. We are some¬ 
times referred to the civil service system in 
Europe. I beg to call attention of gentlemen 
to the fact that the European system and our 
system are very different. The object of gov¬ 
ernment in Europe is to get as far as possible 
away from the people. The people, on the 
other hand, have been trying to get at the Gov¬ 
ernment for many years past. That is the 
struggle which has long been going on there. 
That is the meaning of the senatus consultum 
and the plebiscite now agitating France; the 
question whether the Government shall be or 
shall not be independent of the people. That 
is the meaning of the contest which has been 
going on in Spain for more than a year. That 
is the meaning of the many struggles which 
have agitated Europe for the last two hundred 
years. The object in this country is to keep 
the Government near to the people. We have 
had struggles to remove the Government from 
the people. The late rebellion was such a 
movement. The meaning of the rebellion was 
to make the Government further removed 
from the people. It was not a rebellion against 
this Government merely, but against all free 
and popular Government. 

I call the attention of gentlemen to the second 
page of this bill that they may see what it is 
proposed these four commissioners shall have 










15 


power to do. In the first place, they are to 
prescribe the qualifications requisite for an 
appointment in any branch of the public ser¬ 
vice. Then they are to examine every public 
officer, either by themselves or by their subor¬ 
dinates. Now, of these public officers there 
are twenty-three thousand who will be subject 
to examination. I suppose it will not be too 
much to say that it will, on the average, re- ! 
quire one hour to examine each person. Allow- i 
ing, then, one hour to each person, and allow- jj 
ing six working hours to a day, which is about |j 
the time usually devoted to the public busi- j 
ness, it will require three thousand eight liun- [j 
dred and thirty-three days, or between twelve j! 
and thirteen years, to examine these twenty- ij 
three thousand officeholders. 

Then recollect that not only are these office- jl 
holders to be examined, but all applicants for ; 
office also ; and allowing at a moderate ealeu- jj 
lation at least six applicant's for each office, and j 
allowing one hour for each person examined, ; 
you will have seventy-five years of labor here I 
provided for. And all this is to be done by this 
council of four and their assistants. Why, it is 
a power that is perfectly astonishing, appalling 
to contemplate. It is a machine of great, over- i 
whelming, and overshadowing authority which j 
we ought not to set up in this land without the • 
most deliberate consideration. The expense, 
although a comparatively small matter, because ! 
we can afford to pay for whatever is worth j 
paying for, is not to be overlooked. The sala¬ 
ries, necessary traveling expenses, &c., pro¬ 
vided in the ninth section to be paid to the 
commissioners themselves would not amount to 
very much ; but there is a further provision that 
“the necessary expenses of any persons em¬ 
ployed by said commissioners as assistants” 
are to be accounted for and verified, &c. Why, 
sir, these seventy-five years of labor at this 
rate would amount to a sum which my mathe¬ 
matical abilities do not enable me to calcu¬ 
late even satisfactorily to my own mind. 

I wish to call attention also to the thirteenth 
section of the bill. It is a short section, but 
a very suggestive one. It provides— 

That tho President, and also the Senate, may re¬ 
quire any person applying for or recommended for 
any office which requires confirmation by the Senate 
to appear before said board and be examined as to 
his qualifications, either before or after being com¬ 
missioned; and the result of such examination shall 
be reported to the President and to the Senate. 

This provision would enable a hostile Pres¬ 
ident or a hostile senatorial majority to mor¬ 
tify any officer of the Army or Navy, or in the 
diplomatic or judicial service, or the head of 
any bureau or Department, by calling him 
before this council of four and subjecting him 
to an examination in case he happeued to be 
beyond their reach. 

Now, who will compose this council of four? 
Certainly they will not be men of the highest 
class. First-class men will neither seek nor 


accept these offices. We shall be obliged to 
content ourselves with at least second-rate men. 
It is within the range of possibility that we may 
have a hostile President of an Opposition Sen¬ 
ate who will start against some public man a 
suggestion for an examination, as such a sug¬ 
gestion was sprung in this House the other 
day for an investigation, which is now being 
pursued, concerning the character of one of 
our Army officers. It strikes me that this is 
a dangerous and unnecessary power. 

Mr. FARNSWORTH. As. the law now 
stands a hostile President may turn out an 
officer without examination. 

Mr. MAYNARD. He cannot turn out the 
Chief Justice of the United States or the Gen¬ 
eral of the Army. 

Mr. FARNSWORTH. This bill does not 
relate to such officers. 

Mr. MAYNARD. My friend from New 
Hampshire [Mr. Ela] made yesterday a sug¬ 
gestion which I thought entitled to more con¬ 
sideration than some members were inclined 
to give it, as to the character of men who would 
be likely to obtain offices under such an exam¬ 
ination as is contemplated by the bill. They 
would be, as the gentleman suggests, men of 
mere books, men who could answer perchance 
questions in algebra or geometry, but not men 
of practical ability. Under such a system, if 
I may say it without disparagement, a corps of 
superannuated college boys would come in to 
take the places that ought to be filled by men. 

Mr. Speaker, I have consumed more time 
than I intended. I now yield ten minutes to 
my friend from Maine, [Mr. Peters.] 

Mr. PETERS. Mr. Speaker, I was opposed 
to this bill yesterday, and I am still more op¬ 
posed to it to-day. I said yesterday, and I 
repeat to-day, that if this bill were designed as 
a piece of machinery to be confined entirely in 
its operations to the clerks in the Departments 
here at Washington I might be willing to vote 
for it as an experiment. But I think that even 
with regard to the Departments here the bill 
contains more machinery than is necessary ; 
or, adopting a nautical phrase, there is too 
much horse-power of steam in the bill for the 
craft which it is to carry; for I believe that in 
relation to the Departments here at Washing¬ 
ton, if we had a few stringent rules and regu¬ 
lations made by the heads of the Departments, 
and decently observed, there would be no need 
of a measure of this kind, even as far as the 
employes at Washington are concerned. But, 
sir, to apply the machinery of this bill to all 
the offices outside of Washington, is, in my 
opinion, impolitic and impracticable and im¬ 
possible. In the limited moments I now have 
all that I shall seek to do will be to notice a 
few salient points in the bill. 

Now, sir, this bill covers all the deputies of 
all the collectors and of all the assessors in the 
internal revenue, and all the deputies, all the 















16 


inspectors, and all the under officers of all the 
collectors in the external revenue departments 
of the Government. It covers, all the detect¬ 
ives in both of those departments. If I under¬ 
stand the bill, it covers all the deputy marshals 
in the United States. I hold it also covers the 
clerks of the United States courts wherever 
they exist. I want to know who can judge 
best whether a man be a fit person as deputy 
collector? I ask whether the best judge is not 
the collector, who knows the man, his charac¬ 
ter, his qualities? Is he not abetter judge, 
with all his experience, than a board of stran¬ 
gers who may be sent to the locality from 
Washington ? 

Mr. JENCKES. Will the gentleman allow 
me to ask him a question? 

Mr. PETERS. Be as brief as possible. 

Mr. JENCKES. Suppose the collector means 
to be a thief, would you then let him appoint 
his deputy? 

Mr. PETERS. The President must look 
after the collector. Turn him out. 

Mr. JENCKES. How can he do it without 
this bill? 

Mr. PETERS. This bill does not under¬ 
take to look after the collectors. 

Mr. JENCKES. It does. 

Mr. PETERS. I say, sir, that as the mer¬ 
chant can tell best whom he wants as his clerks, 
so the collector can tell best whom he wants 
as his deputies. Would you leave the depu¬ 
ties of marshals of the United States to be 
appointed by a board of commissioners? Shall 
that board appoint a deputy of the marshal of 
the State of Maine, for instance, for whom the 
marshal has to give a bond, and for whose 
official conduct he is responsible? Will you 
have that appointment taken from the mar¬ 
shal, the man who has to bear the responsi¬ 
bility, and give it to this board of four men, 
who have no knowledge of the candidate, no 
acquaintance with him, his character, his ex¬ 
perience, his fitness for the office ? Although 
a board of four men might examine a candi¬ 
date in what might be called scraps of learn¬ 
ing in etymology, syntax, and prosody, how 
are they going to get hold of the real charac¬ 
ter of the candidate? How are they going to 
know his natural ability ? How are they going 
to know his official aptitude? How are they 
going to know his standing in the community? 
Would you trust it to a board of four strangers, 
or to the collector or the marshal, who know 
more about the applicants for this office? 

But, Mr. Speaker, I must pass along. I 
object to the bill because it gives to four men 
the control of the entire patronage of the Uni¬ 
ted States. I object to the bill in all offices 
less than senatorial appointments, because 
virtually, although you may put in a technical 
denial, it appoints men for a service for life. 
Wo should then have a civil pension list; for 
when a man has once got his situation through 


this board of four schoolmasters you cannot 
easily get rid of him, unless by a sort of court- 
martial. I object to this bill because these 
persons, who are virtually put in for life, may 
be changed about, because a deputy collector 
in Bangor, Maine, may be sent to New Orleans, 
Louisiana. I object to this bill because it gives 
the power to the heads of Departments to say 
what proportion and grades of the appointees 
shall be females. If this becomes the law, by 
and by you may get some fanciful gentleman 
in the Treasury Department who will appoint 
females generally as deputy collectors, assess¬ 
ors, and for other public positions. Power is 
given in this bill by Congress to raise up an 
army of female office-holders, if we should at 
some time get as the head of one of these 
Departments some fastidious, fanciful, and 
partially insane man on this subject. 

I object to this bill, Mr. Speaker, for its 
cumbrousness. Suppose, for illustration, a 
deputy collector is to be appointed in Bangor, 
Maine. There are five hundred men in that 
city fit for the office. All are candidates, and 
all prove on examination that they are com¬ 
petent and fitted for the office. One only can 
be appointed. What will you do with the 
i other four hundred and ninety-nine? Will you 
trust these four schoolmasters or the judgment 
and information of the collector in the com¬ 
munity where the candidates live to make a 
designation of the person most fitted and worthy 
of the place? And I would put the objection 
in another view. If the bill passes, what are 
you going to do with the thousands of crippled 
soldiers all over this country who, though they 
may not be able to pass the highest examina¬ 
tion, and even may not, many of them, be able 
to spell all words with strict correctness, or 
construct the most grammatical sentences, will 
yet fill an office with reasonable and reputable 
efficiency? What are you going to do with them 
after the promises we have made them? Will 
you take the civilian and college-bred boy, who 
can most easily pass such examinations as are 
had, and put aside the soldier who yet can dis¬ 
charge the duties of the office well enough, and 
quite as satisfactorily as others who have filled 
the offices before him? 

Mr. Speaker, the common argument and 
illustration has been that by means of this bill 
we will be able to reform the civil service in 
the city of New York. I know that New York 
is a sample of everything and an exception 
to everything under heaven. But I would 
ask the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. 
Jenckes] how these four gentlemen appointed 
by the President are going to possess the trans- 
cendant power to purify all the official conduct 
of New York city? If the people cannot do 
it, if Congress cannot do it, no power short of 
that of the Almighty can do it. These gentle¬ 
men would find that they were engaged in a 
work of supererogation. 










17 


There is a great taste in mankind for taking 
medicine, and there is a similar taste for legis¬ 
lation for all ills, imaginary and real. There 
is a fancy that all defects of political society 
can be easily cured by the interference of Con¬ 
gress ; and this bill seems to me one of the 
useless attempts. The machinery provided is 
wrong, the principle of this bill is wrong, and 
if you should pass it there would be no end to 
the confusion that would ensue under its ad¬ 
ministration. The old Quaker advised his 
young friend that marriage would be an end of 
all his troubles. The young man, after having 
hadsomeunfortunateexperienceof matrimony, 
upbraided th'e Quaker for such advice, when 
the Quaker replied : “My good boy, I did not 
tell you what end it was ; I meant that it was 
that end which is the beginning of all trouble; 
the first end, and not the last.” So I am afraid 
that this bill, instead of being a panacea and 
cure for anything that is wrong in our system, 
will be that end which will prove to be the 
beginning of trouble. 

If the board sits here in Washington, swarms 
of the constituents of gentlemen will congre¬ 
gate here. And if the commissioners rove over 
the country, this traveling board of school¬ 
masters, tasty and educated gentlemen, and 
Yankees of course, because none but Yankees 
can be schoolmasters—what a scene of delight¬ 
ful array and confusion there will be in the 
various spots where the crowds surround them 
at their very wise examinations ! 

Such is the machinery provided by this bill. 
Mr. Speaker, if there is any abuse in the exer¬ 
cise of patronage on the part of members of 
Congress, it is just in those cases which this 
bill does not cover, namely, the senatorial 
appointments, which it does not attempt to 
reach, except in the ridiculous manner which 
has been commented on by my friend on my 
right, [Mr. Maynard.] Now, for one, I beg 
to say that I do not believe that members of 
Congress desire to exercise any patronage. 
They would be glad to get rid of it if they 
could. In advising an appointment, instead 
of making one friend every Congressman makes 
ten enemies. It is no personal interest which 
I take in this matter. I have nothing to do 
with the appointments of the officers covered by 
this bill even of an advisory character, and the 
newspaper arguments and allegation, that by 
the provisions of this bill Congressmen would 
lose any power or position is unfounded. I 
have other objections to this bill, and could 
name various further points in which it is im¬ 
practicable. But I am admonished that I have 
no time to state them. I will just further say 
that I do not care what other men may say or 
how they may vote; I, for one, boldly and 
unequivocally denounce this bill—with all 
respect for my friend from Rhode Island, for 
whose learning and genius I have not only re¬ 


spect but admiration—-as a scholarly, refined, 
speculative, utopian humbug. 

Mr. MAYNARD. I resume the floor, and 
yield fifteen minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio, [Mr. Bingham,] but shall be glad if he 
will give a portion of that time to the gentle¬ 
man from Wisconsin, [Mr. Paine ] 

Mr. POTTER. With the permission of the 
gentleman from Ohio, I desire to offer an 
amendment. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman may offer 
his amendment in the way of notice. As many 
amendments are now pending as can be enter¬ 
tained. The Clerk will report the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from New York, [Mr. 
Potter.] 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Amend the second section by addin? after tho word 
“regard,” in the eighth lino of page 2, the word 
“ onlyand after the word “ enter,” in the eleventh 
line of the same page, the words “and not to his 
political views.” 

Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, in my judg¬ 
ment this bill ought not to receive the approval 
of the Representatives of the people. How¬ 
ever desirable it may be to reform the civil 
service of the United States it is certainly not 
desirable to attempt it in the mode and manner 
presented by the bill now under consideration. 
I think the learned gentleman from Rhode 
Island [Mr. Jenckes] failed yesterday, in my 
judgment, utterly to answer the objection which 
was suggested to him while he was addressing 
the House upon this bill. It was intimated to 
him very clearly yesterday that this bill was in 
conflict with the spirit, if not with the letter, 
of the Constitution of the United States upon 
its contemporaneous and continuous construc¬ 
tion from the day of its adoption to this hour. 
The learned gentleman avoided the question 
by referring to the regulations which have been 
prescribed from time to time by the legislative 
department of the Government touching the 
land and naval forces. 

Mr. Speaker, the learned gentleman from 
Rhode Island overlooked the fact, when he 
made the reply, that it is a specific provision 
of the Constitution of the United States that 
the Congress may “ make rules for the govern¬ 
ment and regulation of the land and naval 
forces.” Now, let the gentleman, if he please, 
refer to the parallel passage in the Constitution 
of the United States that authorizes the Con¬ 
gress of the United States to make rules and 
regulations concerning appointments to civil 
offices, other than those prescribed in the Con¬ 
stitution. It is provided in that Constitution, 
and I call the attention of the House to it, that 
the President of the United States— 

“ Shall nominate, and, by and with theadviceand 
consent of the Senate, shall appoint embassadors, 
other public ministers and consuls, judges of the 
Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United 
States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise 
provided for, and which shall be established by law.” 








18 


The establishment of rules and regulations 
concerning the land and naval forces is “herein 
otherwise provided for’' by the express pro¬ 
vision that the Congress of the United States 
may “ make rules for the government and reg¬ 
ulation of the land and naval forces. 5 ’ 

The other provision of the Constitution of the 
United States providing for the appointment 
of officers is as follows : 

“But the Congress may by law vest the appoint¬ 
ment of such inferior officers as they think proper 
in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the 
heads of Departments.” 

Beyond that, sir, the Congress cannot go. 

Mr. HOAR. Will the gentleman allow me 
to ask him a question ? 

Mr. BINGHAM. My time is limited. 

Mr. HOAR. It applies to this very point. 

Mr. BINGHAM. Very well. 

Mr. HOAR. It is whether the legislative 
power that creates the office itself cannot pro¬ 
vide its qualifications? 

Mr. BINGHAM. The qualifications may 
be provided for, but it is the appointing power 
I am speaking of. This is not a mere question 
about qualifications. It relates to the appoint¬ 
ing power. 

Mr. Speaker, a provision of this bill to my 
mind very objectionable, but of which I can 
only speak very briefly—restricted as I am to 
ten minutes—is, that the appointing power of 
the United States, as to all civil officers of the 
United States, except postmasters and such 
officers as are by law required to be appointed 
by the President, by and with the advice and 
consent of the Senate, shall be limited to the 
will of a commission composed of four com¬ 
missioners! Sir, without the consent of these 
commissioners neither the President, nor the 
heads of Departments, nor the courts to whom 
this power is confided by the Constitution, can 
appoint any civil officer, except as already 
stated. This is not a mere question of qual¬ 
ification ; it is a question of appointment. The 
bill provides that “ hereafter all appointments 
of civil officers,” except as stated, “ shall be 
made from those persons” found qualified by 
the commissioners, &c. The gentleman has 
suggested the point of the power of Congress 
to prescribe qualifications of inferior officers ! 
I would like to know whether the Congress of 
the United States can confer the authority to 
prescribe the qualifications of civil officers upon 
a board of commissioners? Are they to be 
clothed with legislative powers to say that no 
man in America shall be eligible to any infe¬ 
rior civil office in this country unless he is 
skilled in the higher calculus and capable of 
teaching it in our universities? If the commis¬ 
sioners may determine qualifications, and also 
decide whether the person possesses them, do 
they not control appointing power? 

This brings me, in the hurry of this discus 


sion, to another suggestion that follows logic¬ 
ally from this, and that is that this is a bill 
to create an aristocracy, a privileged class in 
this country, in the very face of that wise pro¬ 
vision in our Constitution that neither the 
United States nor any State of this Union shall 
confer titles of nobility. You propose to create 
here a board of commissioners who are to sit 
in judgment upon every man in the land who 
applies for an appointment to an inferior office, 
and to say to one of our maimed heroes, be¬ 
cause he cannot answer, as one of these boards 
did require a young soldier to answer the other 
day, questions in astronomy, therefore he is 
not to be permitted to keep ordinary accounts 
in the Treasury Department. It is an absurd¬ 
ity, as my friend from Illinois [Mr. Cullom] 
near me remarks. The world found out long 
ago that even the author of “The Mechan¬ 
ism of the Heavens” did not prove himself 
a very skillful man in civil affairs when called 
to a civil trust by the first Napoleon. And so I 
think it will be under the rules which may be 
prescribed by this board of commissioners. 

Another objection which I have to this bill, 
and which ought to be fatal to it, is that it 
clothes this board of commissioners, or board 
of examiners, with power to draw from your 
Treasury annually $23,900. If I heard aright 
the amendment of the gentleman from Rhode 
Island, [Mr. Jenckes,] as suggested by him 
on yesterday, one of these commissioners is to 
receive $6,000 a year. 

Mr. JENCKES. The gentleman is so en¬ 
tirely wrong as to his statements in regard to 
these commissioners and their duties that I 
could not correct him on this point without 
taking too much time. 

Mr. BINGHAM. If the gentleman cannot 
state a fact he is in a most deplorable condi¬ 
tion. 

Mr. BENTON. The bill provides- 

Mr. BINGHAM. I can read for myself 
what the bill provides. 

Mr. JENCKES. If the gentleman will 
take my hint he can ascertain from the bill. 

Mr. BINGHAM. But the gentleman had 
something read from the Clerk’s desk which is 
not in the bill. He asks me to refer to the 
printed text of the bill, and I will do so. This 
provides fora commission of four persons at a 
compensation of $5,000 each, making $20,000. 
Then there is to be a clerk at $2,500, and a 
messenger at $900 a year, which makes in all 
$23,400. Then come the expenses of travel, 
and the power of this board to appoint an 
indefinite number of persons to make these 
examinations all over the country, and their 
expenses and the expenses of the board are 
to be paid out of the general Treasury of the 
United States, thereby creating literally a 
swarm of officers to eat out the substance of 
I the people. 










19 


As I am now limited to ten minutes I must 
be very brief in my statements ; but if there is 
to be a full discussion of this bill 1 challenge 
the gentleman to it. I care not how many 
presses have been pensioned in this country to 
herald the expediency of this legislation ; no 
man can successfully defend this bill, whatever 
may be his capabilities, whatever may be his 
admitted learning. I repeat what I said before, 
and I stand upon it, that this bill is in conflict 
with the spirit and with the letter of the Con¬ 
stitution. It is putting it in the power of this 
board to restrain your President, to restrain 
the heads of your Departments, to restrain 
your courts, who are the only appointing pow¬ 
ers as to “inferior officers” named in the 
Constitution, from appointing anybody as such 
inferior officers without their leave. It is cloth¬ 
ing men with power to establish moot courts, 
and put men on trial for every species of crime 
or misdemeanor they may choosre to define as 
“misconduct,” from a breach of good man¬ 
ners to murder or perjury, 1 to be tried upon 
such evidence as may be taken under rules to 
be prescribed by them. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. MAYNARD. I now yield to the gentle¬ 
man from Wisconsin, [Mr. Paine.] 

Mr. PAINE. I cannot believe if possible 
that any such measure as this will pass this 
House. In the short time allowed me by the 
courtesy of the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. 
Maynard] I can point out but one or two of 
my objections to the practical operations of 
this bill. Let me suppose a case. The Sec¬ 
retary of the Treasury has, I will suppose, in 
his Department a bureau, the organization of 
which is entirely satisfactory to himself. The 
people of the United States hold him respons¬ 
ible for the proper discharge of the duties of 
that bureau, and he is able to acquit himself 
of that responsibility because he has subord¬ 
inates of his own choice, and either directly, or 
through the interposition of the President of 
the United States, he can remove any man who 
shall prove himself incompetent or unfaithful. 
We have, then, a Secretary responsible to the 
people for his own conduct and that of his 
subordinates, and the Secretary has the power 
to acquit himself of that responsibility. He 
has his own chosen assistants and can keep 
them or remove them as in his judgment the 
public interest shall demand. But pass this 
bill, and how then will the case stand? It 
will be impossible for him without the con¬ 
sent of this irresponsible triumvirate either 
to shake off a thief or keep an honest man. 
This board of three has absolute and sole 
power under this bill to prescribe what mis¬ 
conduct or inefficiency shall be sufficient for 
the removal or suspension of the Secretary’s 
subordinates, and to make rules for the manner 
of preferring charges against them, and for 
their trial and for determining their position 


pending such trial. Then they may drag before 
them, under theirrules so established, the Sec¬ 
retary’s tried and trusted officers, and examine 
them, and recommend their dismissal ; and 
thereupon they must be forthwith dismissed by 
the Secretary, and the moment these mighty 
inquisitors file this recommendation the pay 
of the officers stop. The Secretary is absolutely 
helpless, absolutely remediless. lie can neither 
determine what is a good ground for removal 
nor whether such ground exists. He must see 
his chosen coadjutors swept away from him by 
a tribunal which has never had a counterpart 
among any free people, by aboard ofthreemen, 
whose tenure of office is for five years—longer 
than that of the President himself—a legacy, 
it may be, handed down by a former corrupt 
Administration to thwart and hamper and 
trample on a patriotic and able and honest 
Secretary, who is powerless in their hands. 
The Secretary, nay the President himself, may 
deem the retention of these men absolutely 
essential to the well being of the Treasury. 
They may both protest against their removal. 
It all avails them nothing. By the pending 
bill they have no power ; this irresponsible 
triumvirate has all power. Is not this mon¬ 
strous? Is it not absurd? But does the gen¬ 
tleman deny that such are the provisions of 
the bill? Read, then, the first clause of sec¬ 
tion five. It is in these words: 

Sec. 5. And be it further enacted. That said board 
shall have power to prescribe, by general rules, what 
misconduct or inefficiency shall be sufficient for the 
removal or suspension of all officers who come within 
the provisions of this act, and also to establish rules 
for the manner of preferring charges for such mis¬ 
conduct or inefficiency, and for the trial of the ac¬ 
cused, and for determining his position pending such 
trial. 

And read also the seventh section. It is in 
these words : 

Sec. 7. And be it further enacted. That the said 
board may also, upon reasonable notice to the per¬ 
son accused, hear and determine any case of alleged 
misconduct or inefficiency, under the general rules 
herein provided for; and in such case shall report to 
the head of the proper Department their finding in 
the matter, and may recommend the suspension or 
dismissal from office of any person found guilty of 
such misconduct or inefficiency, and such person 
shall be forthwith suspended or dismissed by the 
head of such Department, pursuant to such recom¬ 
mendation, and from the filing of such report shall 
receive no compensation for official service except 
from and after the expiration of any term of suspen¬ 
sion recommended by such report. 

And what is true of the Treasury Depart¬ 
ment under this bill is true of all the other 
Executive Departments of the Government. 
And it is true not only as to bureaus and offi¬ 
cers stationed here in Washington, but also as 
to officers on duty elsewhere throughout the 
entire length and breadth of the Republic, 
except only the local postmasters. It is true 
as to the State, Navy, War, Interior, Post 
Office, and Attorney General’s Departments 
and all their bureaus. It is true as to the 
thousands of officers scattered over the United 














20 


States and Territories, of the classes named, 
excepting postmasters. Secretaries cannot be 
responsible to the people, for they must keep 
or surrender whatever subordinates this mighty 
board shall recommend to them to keep or 
surrender. Comptrollers and Auditors cannot 
be responsible to the people, for they must re¬ 
tain knaves or give up honest men at the bid¬ 
ding of these three irresponsible commission¬ 
ers. Deputy assessors and collectors cannot 
be held accountable for the proper perform¬ 
ance of their own duties, for they must retain 
thieves and rogues, and lose honest, sterling 
assistants at the bidding of this board, which 
has all power, and is for five years responsible 
to nobody. 

Sir, I never encountered a measure so sub¬ 
versive of all just principles of responsibility 
on the part of officers to the people or the 
Government. But this is not the worst of it. 
Not only can this board of three step into any 
Department of the Government and drag out, 
against the will of the Secretary and of the 
President, any subordinate officer therein, but 
a single member of the board may do it. Nay, 
worse, more monstrous, more absurd than all 
this, this mighty triumvirate may actually del¬ 
egate this power to outsiders at their discre¬ 
tion. They may authorize a creature of their 
own to invade the Departments and do what 
the President cannot do, what no Secretary 
can do, what no court can do—drive out the 
subordinate officers of the Government. Does 
the gentleman deny this? Then let me read 
the sixth section of the bill. It stands in these 
words: 

Sec. 6. And be it further enacted. That any one of 
said commissioners may conduct or superintend any 
examinations, and the board may call to their assist¬ 
ance in such examinations such men of learning and 
high character as they may think fit, or, in their dis¬ 
cretion, such officers in the civil, military, or naval 
service of the United States as may be designated 
from time to time, on application of the board, as 
assistant to said board, by the President or heads of 
Departments, and in special cases, to be fixed by 
rules or by resolutions of the board, they may del¬ 
egate examinations to such persons, to be attended 
and presided over by one member of said board, or 
by some person specially designated to preside. 

But this is not all. Though the President 
shall find in one of the Departments a knave 
fit only for the penitentiary he cannot remove 
him under this bill without the permission of 
these grand examiners, if the thief shall de¬ 
mand a trial and appeal to them. A scoundrel 
caught in the actual commission of crime can 
boldly appeal from Secretary and President to 
the mighter committee of three, and laugh 
them to scorn until this committee shall pro¬ 
nounce their judgment. Is this denied? I 
read, then, the bill itself: 

Sec. 8. And be it further enacted. That the Pres¬ 
ident shall have power at anytime to revoke and 
cancel the commission of any officer appointed in 
pursuance of the provisions of this act: Provided, 
however, That said revocation aiid cancellation shall 
not take effect if said officer demand a trial upon 


charges to be preferred against him in the manner 
prescribed in this act within thirty days from the 
! time of being served with notice of such revocation 
j and cancellation, unless he shall be found guilty upon 
1 his trial of the misconduct or inefficiency alleged 
I against him in such charges. The discontinuance of 
J an office shall discharge the person holding it from 
i the service. 

There is another remarkable provision in 
| this bill. It is the last section. I read it: 

Sec. 13. And be it further enacted. That the Pres- 
i ident, and also the Senate, may require any person 
j applying for or recommended for any office which 
1 requires confirmation by the Senate to appear before 
j said board and be examined as to hi3 qualifications, 
either before or after being commissioned; and the 
result of such examination shall be reported to the 
President and to the Senate. 

This applies to officers before and after they 
are commissioned. It is a modest provision, 
whereby a majority of the Senate or an incom¬ 
ing President may send before this drum-head 
committee obnoxious justices of the Supreme 
Court, judges of the circuit and district courts, 
Secretaries of War, of the Navy, and Attorney 
Generals, to be examined as to their fitness 
and qualifications for their varied duties. What 
a farce! What an unmitigated humbug ! 

While, then, no Secretary can remove an un¬ 
faithful officer, even though caught in the com¬ 
mission of crimes, while the President of the 
United States cannot do it, yet this board can 
do it; a single member of the board can do it; 
even an outsider who is not a member of the 
board at all, but who is selected by the board 
for this purpose, can do it. He may make an 
examination, and, for reasons which this board 
may have prescribed, may remove officers who 
are entirely satisfactory to the Secretary and to 
the President, thus interposing between them 
and the faithful discharge of their duties. 

I can vote for no such measure as this. We 
understand what the law now is. Under it the 
Secretary of the Treasury and the other heads 
of Departments are able to discharge their 
duties, to acquit themselves of their responsi¬ 
bilities, because whenever they find faithful sub- * 
ordinates they can keep them, and when they 
find unfaithful officers they can effect their 
removal. But pass this bill, and unfaithful 
officers may be fastened upon them ; faithful 
officers may be removed by this board which 
neither President nor Secretary can control. 

I can vote for no such measure as this. I 
admit that the evils of our present system are 
numerous and ought to be removed ; but this 
remedy is infinitely worse than the disease. It 
would cure a toothache by administering to 
the body-politic the cholera or small-pox. 

I protest against interposing between the 
President of the United States or the heads of 
Departments and their subordinate officers any 
such powerful irresponsible tribunal. I protest 
against the provision of the bill which enables 
mere strangers, men who are not appointed by 
the President or approved by the Senate, but 
who are the creatures and delegates of this 















21 


board, to exercise in the removal of the sub¬ 
ordinate officers of the Departments a power 
which heads of Departments and even the 
President himself cannot exercise. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. MAYNARD. I now yield to the gen¬ 
tleman from Indiana [Mr. Niblack] for fifteen 
minutes. 

Mr. NIBLACK. Mr. Speaker, by those 
who have opposed this bill much has been 
suggested that had previously occurred to me; 
and therefore I shall omit very much I intended 
to say in what I have to submit to the House 
in opposition to it. 

This bill seeks to do by legislation what can 
only be done, in my opinion, by a vigorous and 
healthy public sentiment. The doctrine that 
“to the victors belong the spoils” has a hold 
in party politics that cannot be dislodged by a 
measure like this bill or by any other means 
so glittering and so general. As much as this 
doctrine has been denounced by parties out 
of power, all parties like to practice it when in 
power. It is but natural, reluctant as we may be 
sometimes to admit it, for us all to prefer those 
who sustain us to those who oppose and would 
defeat us, when we have patronage to bestow. 
This preference is often, I concede, capri¬ 
ciously and unwisely exercised ; gross abuses 
are often practiced under the unbridled con¬ 
trol of patronage by those in possession of the 
Government. We have daily instances of this i 
under the Administration now in power, as we i 
have had during many preceding Administra¬ 
tions. But, sir, these abuses are not peculiar 
to our Government; they are more or less in¬ 
cident to all Governments and all forms of 
government. With us all power rests with 
the people, and if the people exercise their 
power wisely all goes well. If they fail to do 
this, weakness and corruption necessarily fol¬ 
low. If the people are deceived by those in 
whom they confide, Congress cannot repair the 
injury by enacting a civil-service bill. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

The SPEAKER. The morning hour has 
expired. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. 
Maynard] has fifteen minutes remaining, of 
which the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Nib- 
lack] will be entitled to ten minutes to-mor¬ 
row morning. 


Thursday, May 5, 1870. 

Mr. NIBLACK. Mr. Speaker, I regard the 
bill which we are considering as a sort of com¬ 
plement to the tenure-of-office act, which was 
so prominent before the country two years ago, 
which caused so much popular excitement, 
which was productive of so much embarrass¬ 
ment to the executive branch of the Govern¬ 
ment, and which has been since modified and 
substantially repealed by Congress. In my 
opinion all the objections so forcibly urged 


against the tenure-of-office act are applicable, 
to a greater or less extent, to the bill under con¬ 
sideration. By this bill the executive branch 
of the Government, and indeed all other 
branches of it that are invested with any ap¬ 
pointing power, are left in the possession of all 
the power they have heretofore had in refer¬ 
ence to appointments to office, while it tends 
to abridge their authority with respect to the 
removal of officers and to circumscribe to some 
extent the number of persons from whom the 
selections may be made. So far as I am able 
to ascertain, the bill will have no other practi¬ 
cal result. 

The bill leaves in the Executive the same 
discretion at present exercised as to who shall 
be appointed. Under its provisions, if liter¬ 
ally followed, all the appointments under the 
Government might be made from one of the 
States of this Union, because it provides that 
persons who pass the most creditable exam¬ 
ination shall be entitled to preference in receiv¬ 
ing appointments. I do not believe that those 
controlling the present Administration, nor do 
I hope that any future Administration, would 
undertake to practice a literal conformity to 
the provisions of the bill, if by so doing polit¬ 
ical opponents should receive appointments in 
preference to political friends. No party, as 
parties are now organized in this country, would 
feel itself compelled to do this by any law per¬ 
mitting any discretion whatever with reference 
to appointments. This bill would simply en¬ 
able the persons controlling appointments to 
evade responsibility where they did not want 
to assume it, while they would assume respons¬ 
ibility when they saw proper to do so from 
auy personal or party considerations. In other 
words, it would enable them to do by indirec¬ 
tion that which they now do directly. 

So far as my observation has gone all these 
pretended examinations connected with the 
Departments (and we have them now) are but 
means of enabling the Departments to select 
from among their friends those who suit them 
best without saying in so many words, “ We 
select this man because we prefer him, and we 
reject the other because we do not like him.” 
Nobody regards the rejection of an applicant 
or nominee by one of these Departments as 
any indication that the person is disqualified 
for the discharge of the duties of the office; 
such rejections simply signify that the exam¬ 
ining board from some cause, either because 
they do not happen to admire the personal 
appearance of the applicant or because they 
are not much in love with the gentleman nom¬ 
inating him, or from some other capricious 
motive, choose to get rid of him in a way which 
allows the applicant no relief, but only inflicts 
upon him mortification and annoyance. 

Sir, it may become just as important under 
this bill to have somebody to examine the com¬ 
missioners as to have an examination of those 















22 


appearing before them. If we have a faithful 
Executive, firm, resolute, and determined, he 
can accomplish all that this bill seeks to ac¬ 
complish. There will be no efficiency in the 
machinery put in motion by the bill. So that, 
sir, I regard it merely as a means of embar¬ 
rassment to any administration, without any 
corresponding benefits to result so far as I am 
able to ascertain. I think if the bill shall 
become a law you will find the friends of the 
Administration whom those in power desire 
to have appointed will still be appointed, and 
you will find means will be resorted to to get 
rid of obnoxious persons in some way or other 
notwithstanding the provisions of this bill. 
Even if you should make the bill much more 
stringent on the subject of removal there is 
such a process known as “ freezing out” per¬ 
sons who are not desired to be kept in office. 
If nothing else can be accomplished men can 
be driven to resignation, which is as effectual 
a mode of getting an officer out as the exer¬ 
cise of the power of removal. 

I am assured by gentlemen familiar with the 
several Departments of the Government that 
the provisions of this bill, if rigidly and hon¬ 
estly enforced, would require the rejection of 
at least three hundred persons in one of the 
Departments alone, maimed soldiers and men 
who served during the war, more or less de¬ 
fenseless persons, having claims upon the Gov¬ 
ernment, who are able to perform the clerical 
duties required of them acceptably, but who 
could not come up to the standard required by 
these gentlemen from schools and colleges, or 
pass examination by the class of men clearly 
contemplated as examiners under this bill. 
There is no necessity for any such thing as this; 
and I will not, therefore, hold the floor any 
longer. 

Mr. MAYNARD. How much time have I 
left? 

The SPEAKER. Eleven minutes. 

Mr. MAYNARD. I yield to the gentleman 
from Maine [Mr. Morrill] for three minutes. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. Mr. Speaker, I 
do not know it is necessary for me to make any 
extended remarks, although I have sometimes 
thought I should like to speak at some con¬ 
siderable length on this important bill. I am 
not in sympathy with the principle or the 
details of the bill. I do not believe it has one 
redeeming quality to correct the evils of which 
it complains. 

In the first place, so far as the clerks of the 
Government are concerned, they have now to 
undergo an examination into their literary 
qualifications. I have no doubt they would 
examine into the honesty or laziness on the 
part of those who are employed as clerks in 
the various Departments of the Government if 
they had the power so to do. The efficiency 
of the clerical force in the various Departments 
of the Government may be secured now as the 


law defines and specifies at the present time, 
and that is to have the heads of the Depart¬ 
ments have the control of all matters in the 
Departments over which they preside. I know 
the grand difficulty in all the Departments, 
for I have been a clerk in one of these Depart-* 
rnents myself. I am perhaps the only member 
upon this floor who has been a clerk here. 

Mr. MAYNARD. I did not know the gen¬ 
tleman had been a clerk, and I yield to him 
two minutes longer. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. I have been a 
nominal clerk here in one of the Departments, 
and know the difficulty in the way ot purifying 
the clerical service. All the clerks in all the 
Departments have got there under the influ¬ 
ence of some member of Congress—some Sen¬ 
ator or some Representative—or some essential 
or important personage in the Government, who 
has recommended certain individuals for their 
positions. They have gone into i he clerical ser¬ 
vice perhaps under an examination, oftentimes 
without; and by the exercise of favoritism on 
the part of the examiners, sometimes those who 
have been essentially qualified to fill the clerical 
position to which they have been recommended 
have been discarded simply because they wished 
to put in others not so well qualified. Such is 
the case, although the law is as stringent as it 
can be made under the gentleman’s bill. 

The great difficulty in purifying the service, 
so far as the clerical force is concerned, is that 
where a man has been found to be incapacitated 
for the position to which he has been assigned, 
and he is notified his services are no longer 
required, the Senator or Representative who 
placed him there says to the Secretary, “ This 
man must be retained.” Now, sir, if Repre¬ 
sentatives and Senators will just act upon the 
principle “hands off,” and allow the Depart¬ 
ments to control their own clerical force, they 
will have accomplished a great ueal in the puri¬ 
fication of the service, and place the clerical 
force, so far as that is concerned, and perhaps 
every other department of the civil service, in 
a satisfactory position. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. MAYNARD. I now yield for a min¬ 
ute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. 
Covode.] 

Mr. COVODE. Mr. Speaker, I have only 
asked one minute for the purpose of stating 
very briefly the reasons why I am disposed to 
vote against this bill, or to vote lo lay it on the 
table. In the first place I look upon it as an 
attempt to establish an aristocracy of office¬ 
holders, and to follow in the lead of the Govern¬ 
ments of Europe, disregarding the voice of the 
people who are instrumental in putting the men 
in power who control the public offices. 1 further 
object to the bill because in its operation it is 
calculated to ignore the claims of the disabled 
and wounded soldiers, to whom we are bound 
, by the strongest possible obligations to give the 










23 


preference in filling those offices. It would 
furnish an excuse to the men who may be 
appointed as examiners to reject the soldier 
when under other circumstances he would get 
the office to which he is entitled. I further 
object to the bill because it would relieve the 
Administration of the responsibility of running 
the Departments. The result might be that we 
might find the Departments run against the 
Administration for the time being in office, who 
ought to have the responsibility of the manage¬ 
ment of the Departments. 

Mr. MAYNARD. Mr. Speaker, I will only 
add a word to what has been said. Suppose 
this bill had been the law in 18G1 when Mr. 
Lincoln came into office, and he had found 
this council of four men standing between him 
and his appointments, those familiar with the 
condition of things at that time can readily see 
what the unfortunate result might have been. 
I am appealed to by many gentlemen to take 
the sense of the House upon the bill; and I 
therefore now move that it be laid on the table. 

Mr. JENCKES. I hope the gentleman will 
not make that motion, or that at least he will 
withdraw it, to allow me an opportunity to 
reply. I propose, at the close of my remarks, 
to move to recommit the bill. 

Mr. MAYNARD. Along with such amend¬ 
ments as may be offered ? 

Mr. JENCKES. Yes. I propose to have 
all the amendments printed and committed 
with the bill. 

Mr. MAYNARD. Then I withdraw my 
motion. 

Mr. INGERSOLL. I desire, at the proper 
time, to offer an amendment, which I send to 
the desk to be read for information. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

On page 2, line three, after the word “commis¬ 
sioners,” insert the following: “two of whom shall 
be women.” 

Mr. KELSEY. I renew the motion to lay 
the bill on the table. I think sufficient time 
has already been consumed upon it. 

Mr. JENCKES. 1 hope the motion will be 
voted down. 

Mr. KELSEY. I demand the yeas and nays 
bn my motion. 

Mr. JENCKES. Very well; let us see who 
want to cut off debate. 

Mr. SCOFIELD. Before the question is 
put, I w T ish to inquire whether this is a vote 
between tabling the bill and recommitting it? 
Mr. JENCKES. It is. 

Mr. SCOFIELD. I think there can be no 
harm in recommitting it. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

The question was taken ; and it wa3 decided 
in the negative—yeas'42, nays 104, not voting 
81; as follows : 

YEAS—Messrs. Asper, Ayer, Biggs, Bird, Buck, 
Cake, Cleveland, Amasa Cobb, Conner, Covode, 
Dickey, Dickinson, Getz, Gilfillan, Hamilton, Harris, 
Heflin, Hotchkiss, Ingersoll, Kelsey, Mayham, May- 

’» * . % 


nard, Mercur, Milnes, Samuel P. Morrill, Morrissey, 
Niblack, Orth. Packard, Peters, Reeves, Shanks, 
Lionel A. Sheldon, William J. Smith, Stiles, Swee¬ 
ney, Tyner, Van Trump, Van Wyck, Wilkinson, 
Williams, and Winans—42. 

NAYS —Messrs. Allison, Ambler, Ames, Arnell, 
Banks, Beaman. Beck, Bennett, Benton, Blair, 
Booker, GeorgeM. Brooks, James Brooks, Buckley, 
Buflinton, Burchard, Burdett, Cessna, Churchill, 
WilliamT. Clark, Sidney Clarke, Clinton L. Cobb, 
Coburn, Conger, Cowles, Cox, Cullom, Degener, 
Dixon, Donley, Dox, Duval, Ela, Farnsworth, Fer- 
riss, Ferry, Fisher, Fitch, liale, Hawley, Hay, Hoar, 
Hooper, Jenckes, Alexander II. Jones, Kelley, 
Ketckam, Knapp, Knott, Lash, Lawrence, Lough- 
ridge, Lynch, McCrary, McGrew, McKee, McKen¬ 
zie, McNeely, Eliakim H. Moore, Jesse II. Moore, 
William Moore, Daniel J. Morrell, Myers, O’Neill, 
Paine, Peck, Perce, Phelps, Potter, Randall, Rice, 
Rogers, Sargent, Sawyer, Schenck, Scliumaker, Sco¬ 
field, Shober, Slocum, Joseph S. Smith, Worth¬ 
ington C. Smith, William Smyth, Starkweather, 
Stevenson, Stokes, Stone, Stoughton, Strickland, 
Tanner, Taylor, Tillman, Townsend, Trimble, Up¬ 
son, Voorhees, Cadwalader C. Washburn, AVells, 
Wheeler, Whitmore, Willard, Eugene M. Wilson, 
Winchester, Witcher, and AVood—104. 

NOT VOTING —Messrs. Adams, Archer, Arm¬ 
strong, Atwood, Ax tell, Bailey, Barnum, Barry, 
Beatty, Benjamin, Bingham, Boles, Bowen, Boyd, 
Burr, Benjamin F. Butler, Roderick R. Butler, Cal¬ 
kin, Cook, Crebs, Davis, Dawes, Dockery, Dyer, 
Eldridge, Finkelnburg, Fox, Garfield, Gibson, Gris¬ 
wold, llaight, Haldeman, Hambleton.Ilamill, Haw¬ 
kins, Hays, Heaton, Hill, Hoge, Holman, Johnson, 
Platt, Poland, Pomeroy, Porter, Prosser, Ridgway, 
Thomas L. Jones, Judd, Julian, Kellogg, Kerr, 
Lafiin, Logan, Marshall, McCarthy, McCormick, 
Morgan, Morphis, Mungen, Negley, Packer, Palmer, 
Roots, Sanford, Porter Sheldon, Sherrod, John 

A. Smith, Stevens, Strader, Strong, Swann. Taffe, 
Twichell, Van Auken, Van Horn, AV r ard, William 

B. Washburn, Welker, John T. AVilson, and AYood- 
ward—81. 

So the House refused to lay the bill on the 
table. 

During the roll-call, 

Mr. SCOFIELD stated that Mr. Armstrong 
had paired for the day with Mr. Holman. 

Mr. FINKELNBURG stated that he had 
paired on this question with Mr. Bingham. 
Mr. Bingham would have voted u ay,” and he 
(Mr. Finkelnburg) u no. ; 

The result was announced as above recorded. 

Mr. JENCKES. I rise to close the debate, 
and at the close of my remarks I shall move 
to recommit the bill and all the amendments 
pending to the committee. I now yield five 
minutes of my time to the gentleman from New 
Hampshire, [Mr. Benton.] 

Mr. BENTON. Mr. Speaker, I regard the 
vote just taken as no indication whatever of 
the sense of the House on the merits of this 
bill. As I look upon it, the motion to lay the 
bill upon the table after it has been assailed 
by it3 opponents through a long period of 
discussion without giving the gentleman who 
reported the bill an opportunity to reply, was 
hardly fair play, and for one I voted against it, 
although I am opposed to the bill. 

This bill is offered as a grand panacea to 
remedy all the evils with which the body-pol¬ 
itic is afflicted by maladministration or mis¬ 
management of the civil affairs of the Govern¬ 
ment. And, sir, I consider it wholly inadequate 










24 


to accomplish the ends for which it is recom¬ 
mended and which its mover professes to 
believe it is adequate to accomplish. It was 
said by one of the wisest statesmen that ever 
adorned the annals of this country that the 
qualifications for office were honesty, capacity, 
and fidelity. These are the three grand cri- 
terions that should be applied to every indi¬ 
vidual who is selected and appointed to any 
important office. Now, this bill seeks to pro¬ 
vide for securing one of these qualifications 
only. Its aim is to secure educational qualifi¬ 
cations of the highest degree; and I undertake 
to say that no board which can be constituted 
by any appointment under this Government 
can have the means under the provisions of 
this bill of ascertaining whether a man is com¬ 
petent to fill an office possessing the first and 
most essential qualifications, that of honesty 
or integrity. He may be one of the best schol¬ 
ars from our public schools and yet be utterly 
wanting in the essential elements necessary to 
constitute a faithful officer. He may not pos¬ 
sess the requisite qualification of honesty. He 
may not be faithful. His habits may be such 
that he might be entirely unfaithful if appointed 
to office. 

Now, would any business man having charge 
of an important business think of adopting any 
such measures as these for the purpose of de¬ 
termining the qualifications of the men he should 
employ? Would the agent of any large cor¬ 
poration appoint a board to examine the men 
he may desire to employ in his business? 
Would any competent business man adopt 
such a utopian scheme as this ? I take it, not. 
Now, the qualifications for office in the public 
service are just the same, and nothing more 
or less, as the qualifications required for the 
various business departments of life. In many 
cases—and I might say that it is almost the gen¬ 
eral rule—those individuals that graduate from 
our schools with the highest honors have the 
least capacity for the practical common busi¬ 
ness of life. And so it would prove in regard 
to public offices, I apprehend. You may go 
into any Department to-day and you will find 
that the difficulty is not the want of educational 
qualifications. The difficulty is in the want of 
integrity on the part of the appointees. 

Now, the gentleman seeks to ignore entirely 
the principle laid down that an Administration 
that has been elected to power shall have the 
•opportunity to surround itself with its friends; 
not on the principle that “to the victors belong 
the spoils,” but upon the principle that the 
Administration shall appoint to sustain its 
measures those friendly to it and desirous to 
render itsuccessful. Now, I regard this scheme 
as a cunningly devised one for the purpose of 
keeping them out of office unless they belong 
to a particular, select, favorite class, and of 
keeping men in office who have once secured 
positions. ‘ 


The bill provides that a man shall not be 
turned out of office if he can sustain himself 
against the charges that are preferred against 
him. Now, the gentleman who reported this 
bill voted in favor of the repeal of the tenure- 
of-office act, so as to give to the President of 
the United States the sweeping power to re¬ 
move every one from office without assigning 
any cause or reason whatever, and yet he would 
take from the heads of Departments who have 
the charge and the responsibility of adminis¬ 
tering the public service the power to decide 
whether the men under them shall be in sym¬ 
pathy with the Administration. I undertake 
to say that no Administration can ever c'ome 
into power except by a political party; that no 
Administration can sustain itself in power un¬ 
less it has attached to it the support of political 
friends. That principle this bill utterly ignores, 
and I repudiate it as wholly impracticable. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. JENCKES. I will now yield to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Kelley] 
for one minute. 

Mr. KELLEY. I cannot say much in one 
minute. But I want to thank the gentleman 
from Rhode Island [Mr. Jenckes] for having 
introduced a bill which I believe will lead to 
one of the most vital and essential reforms of 
our Government that can be projected. As a 
member of the Committee of Ways and Means 
I have listened to testimony from all classes 
of men, public officers, importers, travelers, 
and others, and on no point was the testimony 
more entirely concurrent than that the frequent 
changes of officers, dependent upon mere polit¬ 
ical influence or character are alike destruc¬ 
tive of the revenues and the general good ser¬ 
vice of the Government. This change cannot 
be made without some great difficulties. 1 see 
the hammer about to fall, and having given in 
my adhesion to what seems to be so unpopular 
a cause in this House I will take my seat. 

Mr. JENCKES. I am not disappointed at 
the reception which this measure has met with 
in this House, for I have frequently said, what 
I wish to reiterate here in the presence of my 
associates, that I believe if any two hundred 
and twenty-eight men were selected by lot 
throughout the United States, you would find 
fewer among the men so selected who would 
oppose this measure in some form than you will 
find among the two hundred and twenty-eight 
members who now compose this House. That 
opposition arises from the defects of the present 
system, which this measure in part seeks to 
remedy. And I wish to have that evil stated, 
and the proposed remedy considered fairly and 
met squarely, so. that if anything is to be done 
or is not to be done thp people may know how 

















25 


their Representatives view a proposed reform 
of this nature. 

I take the testimony of the gentleman from 
Maine [Mr. Morrill] as to the extent of this 
evil. He has placed himself upon the stand, 
and I ask no better evidence concerning the 
condition of the service in the Departments 
here. He speaks from experience, and I hope 
the country will give his remarks due weight, 
as I do. 

But the evil to which he refers is but a small 
part of that which we seek to remedy. The 
Government loses little by the negligence or 
even by the dishonesty of the clerks employed 
in these Departments; that is simply but a waste 
of time and the money paid to them. But the 
loss is in the laziness, indifference, incapacity, 
and dishonesty of the twenty odd thousand who 
handle the public money. And to that portion 
of the public service this remedy should be 
applied. I wish the House and the country to 
know that this measure is not aimed at these 
Departments. It is aimed to reform the great 
civil service of the country, and to save to the 
tax-payers of the country the millions that 
now go into the pockets of thieves and their 
associates and confederates. 

I wish to meet the arguments against this 
bill which have been made here 5 to meet them 
one by one, and see how they will bear the 
test of discussion and examination. In the 
first place, I address myself to the gentleman 
from Tennessee, [Mr. Mayxard.] He says 
this is a measure to remove officers one long 
step from the people. Sir, let me ask, what 
chance have the people now to gain admission 
to these minor offices ? Who ever obtains an 
appointment except through some political or 
personal influence? Who of the thousands of 
men wishing to serve their country can go up 
to the doors of our custom-houses or of the 
Departments here, and say, “ I am qualified 
to perform the duties required here; tes 4 t me 
and let me try;” who can go up and say that, 
and obtain admission there, even by showing 
that he possesses the greatest merit? Every 
one knows that would be impossible; and this 
bill proposes to break down the barrier that now 
stands in the way of the people; to throw the 
doors open, so that the competent may enter 
and the faithful be retained. If that is remov- I 


ing offices further from the people then I cer¬ 
tainly misunderstand the scope of the measure 
I have proposed. 

The gentleman says it is impossible to carry 
this bill into effect on account of the number 
of examinations. The geutleman certainly did 
not do justice to his Own experience when he 
made such a remark as that. Does he not 
know that the largest school can be examined 
in a day? Are not all the colleges in the land 
examined in four days? 

The gentleman entered into a fanciful cal¬ 
culation to show that thirteen years in one 
aspect and seventy-five in another would be 
required for these commissioners to perform 
their duties. Why, sir, the gentleman over¬ 
looked the fact that the commissioners are to 
examine only those who apply hereafter; they 
are not to take in hand the force now in office. 
This disposes not only of this objection, but of 
several objections made by those who followed 
the gentleman in this debate. This measure 
takes effect upon the business of the country 
as it is; and as vacancies occur they are to be 
filled by those who are found most meritorious. 
For the future the Government is to go into 
the labor and skill market, saying, “ We want 
the best we'can get for our money.” This is 
the meaning of the bill in this aspect. 

The gentleman says that it is no flourish 
of rhetoric to say that this is the best Govern¬ 
ment the world ever saw. I agree with him. 
The temple erected by Solomon was the most 
glorious and magnificent upon the earth ; yet 
that did not prevent his degenerate successors 
from making it a den of thieves. Have we not 
seen our civil service turned to the same vile 
uses? 

Let me remind the gentleman from Maine 
[Mr. Peters] who followed the gentleman 
from Tennessee that he misstates, if he does 
not misunderstand, the duties of these commis¬ 
sioners. They are to have no appointing power, 
no control over the Departments ; they are not 
by the mere fact of their creation to regulate 
admissions or rejections. They are not heads 
of Departments, norarethey clothed with any 
of the powers which the Constitution says Con¬ 
gress may confer on the heads of Departments. 
They simply, by their labors, enable the Presi¬ 
dent to see that no rogues, thieves, or incapa- 













26 


bles enter the public service, and enable the 
heads of Departments to weed out those who 
may have gained admission. This is the extent 
of their power and authority, nothing more. 

The gentleman says this is a task too great 
to undertake. He asks, “ Who can reform New 
York?” Certainly if the Government of the 
United States cannot reform its part of New 
York, its public offices in that ciiy, it had better 
abdicate its duties. Because the task is great 
should we refuse to undertake it? If so, let us 
abandon our places. I admit the task is great. 
We have to contend with one of the greatest 
sources of corruption that exists in this coun¬ 
try. But because the task is great the greater 
is our duty to perform it. While we are losing, 
as'we know we do, millions every month by the 
misconduct and inefficiency of our public offi¬ 
cers in that place, shall we say that to reform 
those offices is a task too great to be under¬ 
taken ? The Government may as well abdicate 
which admits that its corruptions are too form¬ 
idable to be extirpated. Sooner or later it 
must yield to them and be overthrown. 

The gentleman says it would not do to apply 
this to the offices as they now are. I do not 
propose to do that; but looking around in these 
Departments I find a good many reasons why 
the gentleman from Maine should be opposed 
to the bill, as also the gentlemen from New 
Hampshire. I find that in the Treasury building 
there are as many employes from the States of 
Maine and New Hampshire as there are from 
eighteen other States. I am prepared to give 
the list. There are one hundred and sixty-nine 
officers from these two States with eight Rep¬ 
resentatives, and but one hundred and sixty- 
seven from eighteen States with eighty-two 
Representatives. Here is a vast preponder¬ 
ance of reasons in favor of these gentlemen 
keeping things as they are. 

Mr. PETERS. In reply to this personal 
allusion, the gentleman will allow me to say 
that I have in the Treasury Department but 
one appointee. All the appointments charged 
to my district were made by my predecessor. 
I never want to make another appointment, 
and I hope I shall never have an opportunity. 

Mr. JENCKES. I was about to refer to the 
gentleman’s statement that he did not wish to 
have any patronage. 


Mr. ELA. As the gentleman has referred 
to New Hampshire, I wish to say that only one 
appointment has been made by me during the 
three years of my service as a member. 

Mr. JENCKES. If these gentlemen do not 
control these appointments it may be a question 
whether the appointees do not control them. 

But I was somewhat surprised that the gen¬ 
tleman from Maine, in his imaginary descrip¬ 
tion of how the President would carry out the 
provisions of the bill, should cast a fling at the 
Chief Magistrate of the nation and the head of 
our party, when little more than a year ago he 
was so urgent on this floor to increase the sal¬ 
ary of the President-elect, and early in this 
Congress was so busy to obtain the repeal of the 
act which prevented the chief importer of the 
country from becoming Secretary of the Treas¬ 
ury. A change has come over the gentleman 
since that time. Has this question of patronage 
anything to do with it? 

Mr. PETERS. Allow me, in a matter per¬ 
sonal to myself, to say that I never used any 
influence to have Mr. Stewart retained as Sec¬ 
retary of the Treasury. 

Mr. JENCKES. I state only a fact which 
was within my personal knowledge. I make 
no imputations and draw no inferences. 

In replying to the remarks of the gentleman 
from Ohio [Mr. Bingham] I shall not waste 
time upon what he has said about the cost of 
this commission. The few thousand dollars 
which he figured up as its total expense will be 
more than covered by the fees from candidates, 
and if the equally fanciful estimates of the gen¬ 
tleman from Tennessee are to be adopted, the 
excess of receipts over expenses would be some 
hundreds of thousands of dollars. But both 
calculations are unreliable and fallacious. 

The gentleman falls into the same error as 
the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. Peters,] when 
he says that these commissioners exercise or 
control the appointing power. They merely 
find fit persons for the appointing power to 
be exercised upon. But whatever the power 
proposed to be conferred upon them may be, 
the gentleman says that it cannot be per¬ 
formed under the Constitution. “ It conflicts,” 
he says, “with the spirit, if not the letter, 
of the Constitution of the United States.” 
If there was the ghost of a constitutional 











27 


question lurking anywhere within this bill it 
would be discovered by the gentleman from 
Ohio. But when we march squarely up to it 
we find it to be the merest shadow. It is no 
more than this: that because the Constitution 
authorizes Congress to confer the appointing 
power upon heads of Departments as to such 
inferior offices as may be established by law, 
that therefore Congress has no right to declare 
what the qualifications for such offices shall 
be, or to describe the class of persons from 
whom they shall be filled ; in other words, that 
although the offices must be established by act 
of Congress, and their duties defined by such 
act, yet because the same act confers the ap¬ 
pointing power upon some Secretary, the ques¬ 
tion of qualifications for those duties cannot be 
considered by Congress; that this clause in the 
Constitution amounts to a prohibition upon 
Congress against defining the qualifications, 
while it may define the duties of the minor 
officers whose appointment it may authorize. 
The statement of the proposition is its own 
refutation. The innate absurdity of it provokes 
ridicule rather than argument. 

“ The contemporaneous and continuous con¬ 
struction from the day of its adoption to this 
hour,” says the gentleman, shows the conflict 
of this bill with “the spirit of the Constitu¬ 
tion.” 

Have Congress, then, been wrong when they 
have declared that their judicial and legal offi¬ 
cers shall be “meet persons learned in the 
law,” from the first judiciary act which author¬ 
ized the appointment of the Attorney General 
and the district attorneys down to the bill which 
has just passed the House reorganizing the law j 
department? Under what hallucination were 
these hasty and ill-considered remarks about 
the insufficiency of the constitutional powers of 
Congress over offices and the incumbents of 
offices which exist only by its volition, uttered 
in the heat of this debate? The great ex¬ 
pounder of the Constitution in this House, 
who delights to tell us that to himself in great 
part the authorship of the fourteenth and fif¬ 
teenth amendments is due, must give more 
thought to the propositions of constitutional 
law he puts forth if he would continue to pre- , 
serve our respect. The question of the gen- ' 
tleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar] ex¬ 


posed the fallacy of the position of the gentle¬ 
man from Ohio. 

The clause in the Constitution authorizing 
Congress “ to make regulations concerning the 
land and naval forces” to which the gentle¬ 
man from Ohio referred was made necessary 
because the President had been made by an¬ 
other clause Commander-in-Chief of these 
forces, and would thereby have the exclusive 
power of making such regulations, if it had not 
been expressly reserved and conferred upon 
Congress. It was a means of subordinating 
the military to the civil power. But no such 
clause was needed with regard to civil officers, 
which are but the creatures of the laws of Con¬ 
gress, and who are at all times within its 
control. 

I pass now to the singular speech of the gen¬ 
tleman from Wisconsin, [Mr. Paine.] He has 
printed more than he spoke ; but in all that he 
has printed there is but a single approach to 
an idea, and that is that the responsibility for 
the character and conduct of subordinates rests 
upon the heads of Departments, and that we 
must hold them responsible. To be sure the 
chief is responsible, and we must hold him so. 
Your Secretary of the Treasury mustbe respons¬ 
ible for a collector in New York ; but what can 
can he personally know of every collector’s 
qualifications and capacity ? It is all beautiful 
in theory, this idea of responsibility in the chiefs, 
but those who have reflected upon the subject 
have discovered its fallacy. Have we not tested 
it sufficiently to ascertain it3 utter worthlessness? 
Was it not done in the attempted impeachment 
of Andrew Johnson? 

The machinery by which this ideal responsi¬ 
bility is to be enforced is too cumbrous and un¬ 
wieldy to be put in motion in time to be of any 
effect. What prevented Andrew Johnson from 
sending one of his pets down to New Orleans 
as collector for a period sufficiently long to 
enrich himself and his confederates, whose nom¬ 
ination was never expected to be confirmed, and 
with whose frauds and peculations the courts 
have been busy ever since? He defied the 
remedy of impeachment for such acts. The 
officers’ terms have long since expired, and the 
money was stolen and cannot be recovered. 
The people must suffer the loss, and this is the 
whole of this fanciful responsibility of superiors. 















28 


But true and just responsibility in all officers, 
is what this bill seeks to enforce. It enables 
the President and heads of Departments to 
find out whether candidates are fit for the 
places they seek, and whether those in office 
are fit to be retained. 

The gentleman from Wisconsin misreads, or 
rather reads backward every provision of this 
bill. He undertakes to state a proposition which 
he says is contained in it, and then quotes a sec¬ 
tion as sustaining his view of the proposition, 
when in fact it states exactly the reverse. 
But the sophistry and its refutation go forth 
together. Either he misunderstands the mean¬ 
ing of the language I have used with much 
care, or I do. Let those who read judge. I 
will not stop to answer such pretense of argu¬ 
ment. It is not worthy of refutation, or even 
of respectful consideration. 

But the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Nib- 
lack] meets my proposition in a fair, manly, 
and straightforward manner. He acknowledges 
his adherence to the maxim that to the victors 
belong the spoils. He favors no restrictions 
upon the President or heads of Departments in 
the making of appointments. The party that 
wins should have the offices; a clean sweep 
and no favor, is his creed. He opposes all 
u tenure-of-office” bills, all restrictions upon 
the discretionary appointing (and removing) 
power of the executive chiefs. He does not 
believe in any improvement of the civil service. 
Its evils are owing to erring human nature, the 
circumstances of the time, the demands of 
party, the necessities of administration. 

I can respect an honest and manly opponent 
who plants himself squarely upon these propo¬ 
sitions, which are in direct antagonism to those 
which I maintain. It is for the purpose of 
taking these minor offices out of the turmoil 
of politics, and of protecting the faithful incum¬ 
bents from the chances and revenges of polit¬ 
ical change that I bring this measure before 
the House and the American people. The offi¬ 
cers who transact the routine business of the 
Government, those who keep its records, who 
preserve its archives, who keep its accounts, 
who assess its taxes, who collect its revenues, 
who disburse the public moneys, should be pro¬ 
tected from all the consequences of political 
agitations. Far down in the sea, it is said, the 


waters are always still, and the business of these | 
offices is transacted far below the surface-cur¬ 
rents of party. If there is any portion of the 
power of the Government outside of the judi¬ 
cial power which should be protected from 
political agitation, it is that which is executed 
by these subaltern clerks and revenue officers. 
These subordinate offices and their incumbents 
should not be tossed upon the angry waves 
of party, but should be, if none others are, ; 
anchored in still water. 

I mean no disrespect, I cast no slur upon 
the meritorious persons in the civil service of 
the United States by what I say. While the 
great body are respectable, we all know that 
there are many in that service who taint its 
character. The worthy have to suffer for the 
conduct of the unworthy. No worthy person 
in that service imagines that I mean any dis¬ 
respect to him. I have been laboring for 
years to make that service respectable and to 
secure permanence in office for the meritori¬ 
ous, while, at the same time, this taint maybe 
removed, this stain wiped away, and the fQul 
ulcer of corruption be cut out and wholly ex¬ 
tirpated. And I know that I have the sym¬ 
pathy of every honest and honorable man in the 
service. 

Shall we attempt to make a reform is the 
question? I present this bill in its broad scope, 
to invite discussion, not to prevent it. I care 
not whether the principle be applied to all the 
Departments of the Government or to only one, 
so that it be fairly tested. If it were a new 
invention or discovery of mine, I should hes¬ 
itate to ask consideration for it at all. But it 
has been tried and found valuable in the expe¬ 
rience of all civilized nations, and I have the 
hope that it may be tried with advantage here. 
We in this Republic have not invented or dis¬ 
covered all that is useful either in government 
or in administration. There are many things 
in the executive and administrative departments 
of other nations that we may study and copy 
with benefit in our own. 

The remedy may seem to be cumbrous, but 
the evil is vast, and must not be nibbled at, but 
comprehended and destroyed as a whole. It 
cannot be mastered by an attack in part or in 
detail. It may be impaired by favoritism or 
[ partisan feeling. I regret that I am obliged 











29 


to admit that nothing in governmental science 
can wholly escape the blighting curse of these 
malignant political diseases. Yet in a great 
degree their virulence may be mitigated and 
their evil consequences lessened. The remedy 
now offered has been found the most effectual 
of any heretofore discovered or devised. It 
may be attacked by those who are interested 
in perpetuating the means by which this pecu¬ 
lation and thievery can be made profitable, and 
it may be criticised unfavorably by the thieves’ 
advocates. But this kind of opposition fur¬ 
nishes the best evidence of its merits. 

The notion has been again brought forward 
in this debate that this bill proposes to create 
an aristocracy. I have several times before 
exposed this bugbear. Who would compose 
this dreaded aristocracy? Who but the in¬ 
spectors. tide-waiters, light-house keepers, j 
gaugers, Department clerks, messengers, and j 
assistant assessors and collectors? A formi¬ 
dable array, indeed, and one likely to subvert i 
the liberties of the country, whose humble de¬ 
pendants they are ! Not a hundred of the offi- | 
cers within the scope of this measure receive i 
over $2,500 a year, and the great majority ! 
less than $1,200. The queens of this aris¬ 
tocratic society, I suppose, would be found 
among the ladies who count money in the 
Treasurer’s office, or who make copies in the 
Post Office and Patent Office at $900 a year. 
What a fearful, nay terrible aristocracy to 
plant among the institutions of a representa¬ 
tive republic ! But the subject is too ludicrous 
to be pursued in this grave debate. The op¬ 
ponents of this measure are at liberty to make 
free use of this “ aristocracy” argument. 

The evils in thepresent system are admitted, 
and it is testified on all sides that they result in 
great loss to the Government. On the other 
hand the objections to the remedy are all tech¬ 
nical. I have not heard a single gentleman 
attack the principle of this measure. I have 
read through the debate of yesterday with great 
care, and I do not find a phrase or aline which 
fell from the lips of any of the gentlemen here 
attacking the principle or decrying the end and 
purpose of this measure. All that was said 
simply attacks the details. Those details may 
be modified if necessary, by consultation with 
the executive department, or otherwise, so that 


some measure may be evolved which shall 
begin to penetrate and destroy this great evil. 
But while gentlemen decry the details, it is to 
be observed that no one has proposed any other 
remedy. If there is such a remedy I should 
like to hear it. It may be better than this, 
and if so I would gladly accept it. I am not 
wedded to this or that form. I simply say to 
the House and to the country, “ If you have 
anything better to offer than this, we will take 
it; if not, try this.” 

Mr. ELA. I wish to ask the gentleman a 
question. He has talked of the defalcations of 
men in office. I would ask him if the propor¬ 
tion of men in office who plunder the Govern- 
mentisgreater than the proportion of defections 
among clergymen, or any other class of men? 

Mr. JENCKES. I will answer the gentle¬ 
man’s question. The subject he alludes to is 
one which I have investigated. The proportion 
is more than ten to one. Hundreds of these 
defalcations of Government officials are never 
heard of. Men who have plundered the Gov¬ 
ernment quietly slide out of offices which they 
have occupied, and are never prosecuted. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

The SPEAKER. The morning hour has 
expired. 

Mr. WHEELER. I move to proceed to 
business on the Speaker’s table. 

Mr. JENCKES. I appeal to the gentleman 
to waive his motion for a little while. I desire 
only about ten minutes more, and we may then 
dispose of this matter by recommitting the bill. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from 
Rhode Island asks unanimous consent to pro¬ 
ceed for ten minutes. The Chair hears no 
objection. 

Mr. JENCKES. Gentlemen have argued 
this matter as if no one were interested in this 
reform or in this subject except members of 
this House and these subordinate employes of 
the Government, who are mainly nominated 
by members of this House. I submit that there 
are millions who are interested in it. Is not 
every tax-payer interested when he knows that 
$50,000,000 of our revenue is either not col¬ 
lected or is wasted? Do they not pay higher 
taxes on everything they eat, drink, or wear to 
make up for the money thus stolen or lost? 
Are not the people interested in keeping away 





















30 


from the public crib those who come to it 
merely to feed and not to serve ? Are they 
not interested in seeing that the public reve¬ 
nues are not consumed by idle, incapable, and 
inefficient persons, or stolen by the dishonest? 
I say they are interested. 

There is not a lumberman wielding the ax 
in the woods of Maine who is not interested 
in having honesty and fidelity in every fiber of 
this Government. There is not a fisherman 
on our seas, sailing by St. George’s banks, or 
those of Newfoundland, 

“Bent primly o’er his straining lines or wrestling 
with the storms,” 

but is interested in knowing that the public 
affairs are honestly, ably, and faithfully cared 
for at home. There is not a farmer now driving 
his plow through the cold soil in our northern 
States who does not at times stop to think 
whether the public servants are dutiful and 
faithful. There is no planter watching his 
crops in the cotton lands or rice lands of the 
South; no miner delving among the Sierras ; 
no herdsman tending his herds on the plains 
of Texas; no shepherd guarding his flocks 
among the mountains and along the hill-sides, 
who is not interested in the subject we now 
have before us. They work with nature ; their 
return is what God’s blessing gives to faithful 
working and waiting and watching and tending 
and guarding. Upon them at last fall all the 
burdens by which this Government is sustained 
and the nation lives. 

Is it nothing to this vast multitude of honest 
workers and toilers and delvers that their bur¬ 
dens of taxation are increased by the incapa¬ 
city and dishonesty of those whom they pay 
liberally for service and protection? Is it 
nothing to these millions who are wresting a 
scanty subsistence from the reluctant elements 
by daily and nighty toil, that there are those 
in their pay who are watching the chances 
for what are called u pickings and stealings” 
around our great custom-houses and through¬ 
out our internal revenue ? Is it not a matter 
of thought with them that there are hundreds 
and thousands fastened on to our revenue 
'service in both branches who have attached 
themselves to it, not to serve and collect, but 
to waste and steal ? 

I for one believe that this is a matter 


which goes straight to the hearts of the people. 
Others as well as myself have for the last few 
years been writing and speaking upon this sub¬ 
ject; and what we have said has not fallen 
unheeded. The nation has been set to think¬ 
ing upon this question. The seeds of thought 
have fallen upon good soil. The relations of 
the public servants to the Government and their 
duties and responsibilities are better known and 
considered. There are few among the workers 
in this nation who are not watching to note 
what action this Congress may take upon this 
subject. But whatever may be the sentiments 
of members here, if their action be adverse to 
this great reform, I appeal from the Represent¬ 
atives of the people against that action to the 
American people themselves. I believe that I 
know that they are always desirous of having 
faithful and efficient public servants, and that 
they are not slow to bestow upon them honors 
and rewards. I believe that they wish to see in 
every Department of the public service men 
who are faithful, diligent, and honest. I do not 
think ttiis is a matter to be brushed away lightly. 
Wherever there has been an opportunity to 
speak the people have spoken one unanimous 
voice. The press, which reflects the popular 
mind, has printed but few dissenting opinions, 
and those have been readily traced to inter¬ 
ested sources. Wherever and however expres¬ 
sion has been given to the popular thought, or 
where thought has been given to this subject, 
there has been commendation of a measure of 
this kind. I care nothing about details. Wipe 
them all away if you choose. Bat while the 
magnitude of the evil is admitted, and while a 
remedy is believed to be possible, give us some 
measure which will be a stand-point from 
which the enemy can be attacked and destroyed. 

I do not think that any Department of this 
Government can long afford to have charges 
of what I may call cadetship scandal brought 
against it year after year; and the exercise of 
the present mode of appointments is simply 
the exercise of the sale and barter of cadet¬ 
ship appointments upon a large scale. It is a 
source of corruption in every way. There is 
nothing honest, faithful, or manly about it. I 
hope to live to hear its death-knell sounded. 

If I have a minute left I yield it to the gen¬ 
tleman from Ohio, [Mr. Schenck.] 












Mr. SCHENCIv. Mr. Speaker, I only want 
this minute from my friend from Rhode Island 
for the purpose of putting myself upon record 
in connection with this bill of his. I have 
watched the great ability and patient labor 
with which he has so long prosecuted his pur¬ 
pose of bringing about a reform in relation to 
the civil administration of the Government; 
and I desire, for one, to thank him for that 
labor. If the bill should be recommitted he 
will take it back for consideration of the vari¬ 
ous suggestions that have been made in refer¬ 
ence to its details ; but before it is thus recom¬ 
mitted, having no time to present any argu¬ 
ment, as occasion to do may hereafter arise 
upon the general subject embraced in his prop¬ 
osition, 1 wish to say, for one, that he can 
hardly put the bill in any shape whatever, so 
that he preserves the principle of it, in which I 
will not give it my hearty support as the initia¬ 
tion' of a salutary and much-needed reform. 

Mr. JENCKES. I now move that the bill 
and such amendments as may be pending or 
offered be recommitted to the committee and 
printed. 

Mr. ARNELL. I desire to offer the amend¬ 
ment which I send to the desk. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

Amend in section twelve by striking out all after 
the word “act,” in the third line, down to tbe word 
“ and,” in the tenth line, as follows: “And the heads 
of the several Departments may. in their discretion, 
designate the offices in the several branches of the 
civil service the duties of which may be performed 
by females as well as males, and for all such offices 
females as well as males shall be eligible, and,” and 
inserting in lieu thereof the words “without distinc¬ 
tion of sex.” „ „ 

In the thirteenth line strike out all after tho word 
“ aforesaid” to the end of the section, as follows : 

And the names of those recommended by the ex¬ 
aminers shall be placed upon the lists for appoint¬ 
ment and promotion in the order of their merit and 
seniority, and without distinction other than as 
aforesaid, from those of male applicants or officers. 


Mr. LOUGHRIDGE. I offer tbe.following 
amendment: 

After the word “ grade,” in lino eleven of section 
three, insert the following : 

Provided , That in making appointments to such 
positions a fair and just distribution shall be made 
to each State, in proportion to its population, when 
there are applicants of sufficient merit, qualifica¬ 
tions, and ability, even although to make such equal 
distribution the general order of absolute prece¬ 
dence on the list shall be waived. 

Mr. STEVENSON. I desire to offer the 
following amendment: 

Amend section seven by striking out of line seven 
the words “found guilty of such” and inserting in 
lieu thereof the words “so charged with.” 

Strike out in line eight the word “shall” and 
insert in lieu thereof the word “may.” 

Mr. O’NEILL. I move to strike out section 
four, providing for a fee of five dollars to be 
paid by each applicant for examination and a 
fee of ten dollars for each certificate of recom¬ 
mendation. 

Mr. TOWNSEND. I give notice that I will 
move to amend this bill by striking out the 
proviso of the eighth section. 

The proviso was as follows: 

Provided, however. That said revocation and can¬ 
cellation shall not take effect if said officer demand 
a trial u^on charges to be preferred against him in 
the manner prescribed in this act within thirty days 
from the time of being served with notice of such 
revocation and cancellation, unless he shall be found 
guilty upon hi3 trial of the misconduct or inefficiency 
alleged against him in such charges. The discon¬ 
tinuance of an office shall discharge the person hold¬ 
ing it from the service. 

The bill, with the proposed amendments, was 
ordered to be printed, and recommitted to the 
select Committee on the Reorganization of the 
Civil Service of the Government. 

Mr. JENCKES moved to reconsider the vote 
by which the bill was recommitted; and also 
moved that the motion to reconsider be laid 
on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 















































* 







* 




p 


n 











































f 












» 








\ 



























- ~s, IK J' * 

«•<>«. O ,<V . 




; ° v\^ *V ° ^ 

v^ 3 f§r* <y * . 

+'/??' A <y 


r. « [|\\\nNS. ® <?5 ^ 

<£> o> ‘ • <1 r Q~ * 

>S> <, !>To 0 aV o 

C\ V C • « * N 

A *> 

!. •* /« 



. •>• a 

9 O V 9 

\0 ^ 

> ^ ^ r£* ^ 

* /nO ^ * 

.,,•’ ^° % * 


- <J 

, * ^ N* 

-* <u r *’ NX ^ r !* ^ 

A AjK®&.' ^ «, v ,* 

"W .»J 


‘ A % *v? 7 ?» A 
r 0 . ; b A % 

0 o v 



w v :mM>il '**'£ mass. ^ . 

5> ^rv -* o aV^ * ls/vAA^A *, c ^ 

■* 4y x?* ov vi ^ 

A <^ ''o.»*‘ ,6* *o'**, 

_ A y'jrp-*' ^ "° v ‘ o -"°'*-" ? ’ 0 

'«*‘(P ’’o v’ :£mzbK< ’v o 


« «5 °^. 5-° ^ *. 

■ • • y % / V^V' 

V e y * c>. .<y *s**, ■*> A 

A. * -£ A t V <* 

^ A- n ^-A ~ 4 ^SPvjm ; ^^5v. A ► . 


pi^‘ AV * 

<y & < 

"'^VT* A <V 



MW : #*\ : * 

% «>o A% ,0* 

* . N * 2?/[/7s i > *jr V 

^ dK\\l//xyz> * ^ & 


%> C > 

* ^ o< • 

o <- 0 

\V °^ + e ' 1 * $? 

V ^ O <0 s 

'• % ^ *>Va % ^ .‘ij 




r-t#f ° a v ^ o 

- ->28P^ ^ * 

0 - "••** ^ <A 

- ^ 0 t * a <£ 

■^O v* - ’ 


^ q. > • <o v* 

' ^ «■ e ^ym ^ > ^ “ ■ 

r- - -vrg * <5 ^ O #- ^ ^ 

^ *©n0 5 O **,i» ^ '"'^To* 

< ♦ * . . \ v */* ; A. v\. O H 0 A v 

v .- 


° W// »« \\M' ' c$ ^rv 
i o M/^-v^Vk * 'ey '"Ca 

<y (A Kd +< 

^ sQ) c 

c 



: A^- °"W!‘‘ ^ \. \. 

^ ^ ” , ° * * * lC5 ^ +4 

+ r O AV . I ' a „ <?>, /-vV . 0 M o *P 

S' o t* ^^ /*0 C° o 

«»* \N ^ £g’/ff/?2_ *y Kj • <^SS^\ ^ O ; 

vx K ’ V 1 . « ' < ^^\\ri'^a' ,> J 

o > • iy^l ** v^* 0 » 

^ 


\0 vl* ^ 

rv , ^ "Z r S//tU'& ^ ^ 

<$ ,.„ -i- “’ A 0 .. y. Ay o *7A- 0 ° 

^v’ , '»•**'’ '■o ■v;y;v' a 

A v , \. i a <P. aV 0 n <j Vy A> 

.1^ t r^l<, ^ *P /V C ° . ♦ O A A» 

*S + X-rff/A? vr c • O 

^ yd- K fcM0A * V»» « ' ‘ 

O > « Af\ ■< *jU rvV o 


■vwy^ , ^ 

^* s % A 


°o 


o ^ A 0 A 

• .*i 

gag'.* yA • 

wfS*r> ^ A' °. 

’"*• s 5 A <, 'o 

O A^ , t / a <P 

° A ^J 


9 V»>fn 9 v r 9 

V ^<. * 

^ , . <, * .0^ ^ 


**oTo 5 ' < A i ^o o^ ^ 

• •%, & .» -v ^ , 

'” ^Na\^w// 2 , ° tiv a 

* -3 




•5 vT, 






















‘ .N * 

♦ O V * 

>’ !>° V. - 

^ rv *p 

/ ”> ^v <p~ * 



•„ ^ **- 
S ^ 


* A -v • 




- °o ,-b I 

* <\ * 

» ^ <y- k 

• o V » 


* V Vi 

. *+ o* : 

? ^ °-* ’ 

*° ^ V* .«•.. %. 1 

^ A* ♦rfftW/V' <4* • 

VA r ^ v . 

* £ % wpp'v '. 

a\ V '° • * * ^ »* ^> <* 

>CT o 0 " 0 ♦ ^o A V , I' * _ *b 

0 * c^v^Vv^ O .ffr t 

^ d* ° 


V *"’• A 0 ' 

% ,y\'"-' 

; V „<£ * 



^ *».o’ A 




° a^A ° 



\y v", 

> ^ V* <£* ° 

^ o ^ *p 

•rr.•’ a 0 +■- • 

C\ » c • • 



• ^ A* •* 

: <*V !J^W4« w 

* <W vJV _ ° A ^ O 

4 ^ V ° * A/ ^ O 

... % ■'••* A ^ 



V 


. ^ A 

: W 


> ■* 



6 ^ 4 ' 

* v- cr ® 



A CL 

v <?- r<> 

" V «■ 

• ^ r c* * * 

\ v . ._ V *"’* *° 



' v> ^ - 

' ♦ 4/ * 

a\ f v '° oA ^ o 

< A * C * * * r\ V o N o 

i y' t /•vi c - * C 

N * I&ffl77sh rr C •_ s ^\ 5 Xv ^ 

< rs> < 


^ V’ * T. *.°- 'O 


: - 


* a/ 



*o A®’ ^ 

cy * 
• L. V 




<3 


° ° 



., °^. *" 1 * ’ A° 

V »’V* cv 

• V a* ; 

° -L ^ • 


• d v -V. ': 


,* > 



v - <b 'o • *■ * -G v ^ ' v ''? , -.‘s s .A ^ 

,• l JJ!'. ^ (.o^ «^« % ’ / b ^ .t«., ^ 

^ ** • r4 ^ Nx ^ o . e /K>Z-, *r ^ 


L-o^ 


J. 0 V\ 

’ * rv ^ 

• * 1 A U ^ * 



C'. a 0 vL’^L'* V' * Y * °* <? 


: .* y * 


A 



• % ^ *- 
: \^v 


A 


'o.* * <6 




° A c^ < 

l ^ f • 

VA * 


• ^ ^ . 



* •% <& * 
; ,s 6 V. j ■ 


<u. '«•** j> 


4 A % * 



<p, 4 

V* 0 T 


< o 

s' A> ^ 

« <1 v o A. 

f> * o « o » ^ O 





ip 

^ ^<5>'**°ho' a, 

A 5 S", ^ -V 

*• % ^ •‘/a^*. -l. /. 


° ^5 ^ v 

» a «■ 

0 * ^ CV. * 



’«^G' 


* 4y <*■ ° 





*$* \V 


• <-G ^ 

* w 

4 V *. 


■d^ f ^ 

ir^ j ' ,o * 



^ ** ( 

•'* f 0 

• t\ A>P l 

'tf'n <i» » 

° ", 

„* ° l 

^y <?* 


<* 


o, a 

0 V 0° " ° * ^O <G l » A ■<£ 

1 o sjA ^ 

* ^4 aV 0 



. A % '• 

■ y y a 
















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































